NationStates Jolt Archive

swastikas are illegal???
wow, what if someone on here is a buddhist or hindu and wants to use the very popular and ancient symbol for peace and harmony which has been plastered on temples, murals, tapestries, etc. for thousands of years!

swastikas don't just stand for nazis, you know. only a eurocentric bigot would think so.

for shame!

swastikas are illegal???
wow, what if someone on here is a buddhist or hindu and wants to use the very popular and ancient symbol for peace and harmony which has been plastered on temples, murals, tapestries, etc. for thousands of years!

swastikas don't just stand for nazis, you know. only a eurocentric bigot would think so.

for shame!
we've been over this a million times. NO SWASTIKAS. i believe they can be used in rps tho'

There are legal issues that come up in some nations, and the admin decided it'd be better for NationStates to be legal in such than to allow people to use swastikas, which were being used very prominently by numerous neonazis in NationStates.

Most people who are Buddhist, Hindu, etc can understand that there are problems arising from the symbol's recent and highly visible use by the Nazi Party of Germany and the even more recent use, sprung from that, by various political and social groups seeking to emulate the Nazis.

swastikas don't just stand for nazis, you know.It's my understanding that only the "counterclockwise" swastika (or more properly, "swavastika") was used by the Nazi Party. Shouldn't a "clockwise" swastika then be suitable, since people are smart enough to recognise the difference?

(Although, come to think of it, the swavastika would be the symbol prefered by Budhists, at least in Japan.)

the swastika is a symbol of murder and racism...NO SWASTIKAS WILL BE TOLERATED!!!!!

As it has been said before somewhere "The Nazis ruined the swastika's image" It'll take a long time for that stain to be wiped away from that symbol. Although, I imagine that the 'reverse' swastika would be legal in specific countries, it still offends people, I'm sure. So you can't have it on NS. Thats simply all there is to it.

There are legal issues that come up in some nations, and the admin decided it'd be better for NationStates to be legal in such than to allow people to use swastikas, which were being used very prominently by numerous neonazis in NationStates.

The Hammer & Sickle and Red Star are illegal in many countries as well, including Germany. if this was the reasoning, that would be banned here too. But it isn't, in the FAQ it's simply "because I said so," and you can't argue with such fiat reasoning. Even the Nazi Swastika doesn't "represent" anything more than a nation through a particular historical period. The fact that it's banned only helps reinforce & illicit an ulterior taboo meaning associated with that historical period. But it's to whom the site belongs who has the final say, and no reasoning is necessary to placate every or any point of view, just as if it had been said that no 'Stars of David' are allowed, that would have to be the rule. It's simply something easier to get away with because the social prejudice of the times allows for few outcries against this particular worldview, as opposed to how it would with say, Communism.

swastikas are illegal???
wow, what if someone on here is a buddhist or hindu and wants to use the very popular and ancient symbol for peace and harmony which has been plastered on temples, murals, tapestries, etc. for thousands of years!

swastikas don't just stand for nazis, you know. only a eurocentric bigot would think so.

for shame!


This has been debated well over a year ago. Nothing is changing.

the swastika is a symbol of murder and racism...NO SWASTIKAS WILL BE TOLERATED!!!!!

Which is ironic, because nations are fully allowed to have a tag perpetuating a "..shockingly racist TV show.." (Racism) and a tag where people are "..gunned down without mercy..." (Murder) but it cannot be represented on the nation with a picture, only with much less interpretable and more direct text.

The Hammer & Sickle and Red Star are illegal in many countries as well, including Germany. if this was the reasoning, that would be banned here too. But it isn't, in the FAQ it's simply "because I said so," and you can't argue with such fiat reasoning. Even the Nazi Swastika doesn't "represent" anything more than a nation through a particular historical period. The fact that it's banned only helps reinforce & illicit an ulterior taboo meaning associated with that historical period. But it's to whom the site belongs who has the final say, and no reasoning is necessary to placate every or any point of view, just as if it had been said that no 'Stars of David' are allowed, that would have to be the rule. It's simply something easier to get away with because the social prejudice of the times allows for few outcries against this particular worldview, as opposed to how it would with say, Communism.

The Red Star is still quite present on a RL nation's flag. The Hammer and Sickle are both more recent and less universally despised... and communists in NS use it little for a symbol, unlike neonazis on NS. We've never had any legal issues come up that I'm aware of with other flags, aside from pornographic ones, but this site was listed as illegal in certain countries due to the rather prominent presence of swastikas.

And they were quite prominent. NationStates was becoming the place to go for young up and coming neonazis. I don't necessarily agree that we should of banned swastikas, but we have, and in the end, this has been far less trouble.

The Hammer & Sickle and Red Star are illegal in many countries as well, including Germany.
That's not true.

Although, I imagine that the 'reverse' swastika would be legal in specific countries, it still offends people, I'm sure.Would these be the people who are offended by common sence? Or the people who were offended by the word "niggardly"?

How about this? An inverse cross is a symbol of certain religious practises. As a devout Christian who is offended by this misuse of our sacred symbol, I cannot allow people to flip that around 180° and display a cross. Ban crosses out of respect to all Christians! And that includes our flag!

This has been discussed...12 times in my recent memory. I'd like to say the verdict in each case, in large, scary, red letters.


SWASTIKAS ARE NOT ALLOWED AS FLAGS. NO, IT DOESN'T MATTER IF ITS A REVERSE SWASTIKA OR NOT. NO, DON'T BRING UP TIRED OLD ARGUMENTS ABOUT THE RED STAR AND THE HAMMER-AND-SICKLE. THEY DON'T MATTER EITHER.

THE SWASTIKA HAS BEEN BANNED FROM FLAGS, REMAINS BANNED FROM FLAGS, AND WILL CONTINUE TO BE BANNED ON FLAGS. AS FAR AS I KNOW, THE MODERATORS HAVE RULED IT 'NOT DEBATABLE'. SORRY...WELL, NOT REALLY.


If you absolutely must have Nazi Iconaclature on your nation's page, you may use the SS symbol or any other piece of Nazi pageantry you can imagine. Hell, you can use a picture of Adolf Hitler.

Provided it doesn't have a swastika on it or near it. And if you do use a picture of Hitler, it can't be one where he's wearing the swastika arm-band.

I don't necessarily agree that we should of banned swastikas...

Why not? What good reasons are there to allow swastikas on NationStates flags?

That's not true.

Maybe if you're looking at pre-1990 laws, check German penal code Article 86a. Before the unification, even the East German flag & arms of the compass & hammer were illegal in West Germany.

If you absolutely must have Nazi Iconaclature on your nation's page, you may use the SS symbol or any other piece of Nazi pageantry you can imagine. Hell, you can use a picture of Adolf Hitler.

Provided it doesn't have a swastika on it or near it. And if you do use a picture of Hitler, it can't be one where he's wearing the swastika arm-band.
What's the point of banning swastikas in the first place if you're allowed to do that?

Maybe if you're looking at pre-1990 laws, check German penal code Article 86a. Before the unification, even the East German flag & arms of the compass & hammer were illegal in West Germany.

Surprisingly, I thought that this was 2004, and that there were massive markets in former East Germany selling soviet-era propaganda stuff as kitsch. Including things with the hammer and sickle.

But, I guess this is 1989. Which means that I'm typing this at a giant computer larger than my frikkin bedroom.

Why not? What good reasons are there to allow swastikas on NationStates flags?

To properly simulate real political government ideologies. That's the purpose of this game.

Maybe if you're looking at pre-1990 laws, check German penal code Article 86a. Before the unification, even the East German flag & arms of the compass & hammer were illegal in West Germany.

Even if it was illegal, which is rather unlikely given the fact that there's plenty of merchandise being sold on the streets where the wall used to stand, that doesn't have nearly the ideological ban as the swastika in German society. The Russian Embassy in Berlin had the Hammer and Sickle on its windowpanes until recently (if they took them off at all). The SS symbol is banned, the Swastika is banned, and so is any NS symbolism that is not being used in a historical context. There is no such public disapproval of the Hammer and Sickle.

To properly simulate real political government ideologies. That's the purpose of this game.

Slow down boy! Down, I say! Nazism is a political idealogy? Wow...someone better go find Hitler's ashes and stop them rolling in his urn... Nazism is a Populist Movement. Not a government idealogy.


You want to talk about the proper government idealogy, use Fascist propaganda from Italy. Or, since we're all English Speakers, use some of Mosley's iconoclature.

To properly simulate real political government ideologies. That's the purpose of this game.
I consider the swastika extremely offensive. I feel that whoever displays it is mocking the terror of the Nazi government by making it seem harmless.

What's the point of banning swastikas in the first place if you're allowed to do that?

I don't make the rules, I just obey them with a dejected attitude. Now, all of you stop questioning the Swastika rules. it's a waste of all our time.

Surprisingly, I thought that this was 2004, and that there were massive markets in former East Germany selling soviet-era propaganda stuff as kitsch. Including things with the hammer and sickle.

But, I guess this is 1989. Which means that I'm typing this at a giant computer larger than my frikkin bedroom.

it is 2004, which is why it's illegal to display or use the Hammer & Sickle outside of historical or educational purposes. I don't know the laws concerning collecting. However this is a use of the symbol in the game, not a thing of 'memorabilia'

[/QUOTE]
And if you do use a picture of Hitler, it can't be one where he's wearing the swastika arm-band.[/QUOTE]

thats not a lot of pictures is it

I don't make the rules, I just obey them with a dejected attitude. Now, all of you stop questioning the Swastika rules. it's a waste of all our time.
It was more a rhetorical question. I think we should ban pictures of Adolf Hitler, the SS symbol or any other Nazi symbolism. Just banning the Swastika isn't enough.

Surprisingly, I thought that this was 2004, and that there were massive markets in former East Germany selling soviet-era propaganda stuff as kitsch. Including things with the hammer and sickle.
I actually bought a berret with a red star on it on holiday 3 weeks ago.

it is 2004, which is why it's illegal to display or use the Hammer & Sickle outside of historical or educational purposes. I don't know the laws concerning collecting. However this is a use of the symbol in the game, not a thing of 'memorabilia'
You're not gonna get jailed or evil looks from passersby if you wear any of it in Germany though, something that might happen if you did wear Nazi memorabilia.

Slow down boy! Down, I say! Nazism is a political idealogy? Wow...someone better go find Hitler's ashes and stop them rolling in his urn... Nazism is a Populist Movement. Not a government idealogy.


You want to talk about the proper government idealogy, use Fascist propaganda from Italy. Or, since we're all English Speakers, use some of Mosley's iconoclature.

Martin Heidegger? Alfred Rosenberg? National Socialism was a government political ideology, it was based on the Socialism pre-Marxism and pre-private critique (before Das Kapital), ala the Socialism of Louis Blanc and the early French Socialism. It was a Nationalized 'introverted' Socialism, it had no real ideological connection to Fascist as it opposed the National Aristocracy and opposed Class structure unlike Fascism.

in germany

it is 2004, which is why it's illegal to display or use the Hammer & Sickle outside of historical or educational purposes. I don't know the laws concerning collecting. However this is a use of the symbol in the game, not a thing of 'memorabilia'

A game owned by an Australian, on a British website.

Oh, dear. Look, forget arguing about it. As I said, you will not win. The swastika is:

BANNED!!!!!!

And it will remain such forever and ever and ever, amen. No other images, besides pornography of course, are banned. They are unlikely to be banned, but if they are I'd expect the same sort of nonsense.

You read the rules before you signed up. I'm assuming you also read the FAQ. This is Max Barry's private property, and his word is law. Don't like it, feel free to leave.

You're not gonna get jailed or evil looks from passersby if you wear any of it in Germany though, something that might happen if you did wear Nazi memorabilia.
my friendsdidn't like it though
They're all capitalists, they can't get socialism into their heads however me and my freinds are 12 but i'm policticaly aware

Literally every few days someone accuses my region, "The German Empire" of being a "Nazi" region. We get invaded by anti-Nazi alliances. We finally had to put "WE ARE NOT NAZIS" in our World Factbook Entry just to stop the flood of insults and attacks.

I'm against censorship, but I support banning the swastika on NS. Banning the swastika isn't censorship - I think it's a commonsense measure. If nations can run around with swastika flags claiming they're "German" they reflect bad on REAL Germanic regions, like 'The German Empire' which is an imperialist region from pre-World War One. I'm sick of people assuming someone is Nazi simply because they see the title "German." People with swastika flags only reenforce this false stereotype....

Get rid of the swastika, and hell, I'd even support banning the hammer and sickle too, both are symbols of mass murder and hate which don't belong in a game. My two cents anyways.

Kw.II

Martin Heidegger? Alfred Rosenberg? National Socialism was a government political ideology, it was based on the Socialism pre-Marxism and pre-private critique (before Das Kapital), ala the Socialism of Louis Blanc and the early French Socialism. It was a Nationalized 'introverted' Socialism, it had no real ideological connection to Fascist as it opposed the National Aristocracy and opposed Class structure unlike Fascism.
Nazis are called Nazis because they were the "National Sozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei" (National Socialist German Workers' Party) They used the "socialist" and "worker" in order to appeal to the poor, jobless Germans. They were not socialist or pro-worker in anyway except that they created new jobs in the armament industry.

The Hammer & Sickle and Red Star are illegal in many countries as well, including Germany. if this was the reasoning, that would be banned here too. But it isn't, in the FAQ it's simply "because I said so," and you can't argue with such fiat reasoning. Even the Nazi Swastika doesn't "represent" anything more than a nation through a particular historical period. The fact that it's banned only helps reinforce & illicit an ulterior taboo meaning associated with that historical period. But it's to whom the site belongs who has the final say, and no reasoning is necessary to placate every or any point of view, just as if it had been said that no 'Stars of David' are allowed, that would have to be the rule. It's simply something easier to get away with because the social prejudice of the times allows for few outcries against this particular worldview, as opposed to how it would with say, Communism.

I am afraid... That that was very well spoken ;)

I consider the swastika extremely offensive. I feel that whoever displays it is mocking the terror of the Nazi government by making it seem harmless.

Or you are keeping the Swastika sacrosanct and inviolable by keeping it away from frivolous use like a holy item, keeping it from being used 'in vain.' The complete opposite of 'mocking' it, which if it's a hated item would be the favorable modus operandi. Freedom of use is for both sides.

it is 2004, which is why it's illegal to display or use the Hammer & Sickle outside of historical or educational purposes. I don't know the laws concerning collecting. However this is a use of the symbol in the game, not a thing of 'memorabilia'
Is this in America because thankfully i'm in in england
if i was in america i think i'd be on death row

Hmm i disagree though. I feel that new nations should not use it, but if the nation is actually a good RPer, and they are serious..not some godmoding noob that goes "OMFG IMMA NAZI IMMA PWN J00" then they should be able to use it, if they can prove they can play a good neo-nazi then they should be able to use it..Perhaps some sort of test is in order.

Hmm i disagree though. I feel that new nations should not use it, but if the nation is actually a good RPer, and they are serious..not some godmoding noob that goes "OMFG IMMA NAZI IMMA PWN J00" then they should be able to use it, if they can prove they can play a good neo-nazi then they should be able to use it..Perhaps some sort of test is in order.

Roleplayers equal exactly 1/7 (probably even less) of the total NS community. And we generally destroy most Nazi nations fairly fast.

I'm afraid not.

Or you are keeping the Swastika sacrosanct and inviolable by keeping it away from frivolous use like a holy item, keeping it from being used 'in vain.' The complete opposite of 'mocking' it, which if it's a hated item would be the favorable modus operandi. Freedom of use is for both sides.
By using it on an internet nation simulation you keep the Swastika sacrosanct? I heartily disagree.

I am not a fan of fascism, or a supporter of Hitler. But censorship is one of the tools that Hitler and others like him have used in the past to control the masses. To censor the swastika because it's controversial is a step that Hitler would have applauded. I'm not saying change it, I just wish that you could admit to your hypocracy.

yes but what if a paticular nation is well established, and decides it is in order for a change of governments?

Hmm i disagree though. I feel that new nations should not use it, but if the nation is actually a good RPer, and they are serious..not some godmoding noob that goes "OMFG IMMA NAZI IMMA PWN J00" then they should be able to use it, if they can prove they can play a good neo-nazi then they should be able to use it..Perhaps some sort of test is in order.
You are not responsible enough to use a Swastika if you consider using it while "playing".

Literally every few days someone accuses my region, "The German Empire" of being a "Nazi" region. We get invaded by anti-Nazi alliances. We finally had to put "WE ARE NOT NAZIS" in our World Factbook Entry just to stop the flood of insults and attacks.

I'm against censorship, but I support banning the swastika on NS. Banning the swastika isn't censorship - I think it's a commonsense measure. If nations can run around with swastika flags claiming they're "German" they reflect bad on REAL Germanic regions, like 'The German Empire' which is an imperialist region from pre-World War One. I'm sick of people assuming someone is Nazi simply because they see the title "German." People with swastika flags only reenforce this false stereotype....

Get rid of the swastika, and hell, I'd even support banning the hammer and sickle too, both are symbols of mass murder and hate which don't belong in a game. My two cents anyways.

Kw.II
In WW1 however it was the germans not the nazis who were the enemies however i support normal in germans in the World Cup or Euro championships even the Eurovision song contest, any europeans will know what that is like.

Nazis are called Nazis because they were the "National Sozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei" (National Socialist German Workers' Party) They used the "socialist" and "worker" in order to appeal to the poor, jobless Germans. They were not socialist or pro-worker in anyway except that they created new jobs in the armament industry.

They were Socialist just not post-Marx Socialist (Communist) Socialism isn't the same as Communism. They were anti-Communist Socialists, they believed in a controlled redistribution and urban renewal / public ordinance, not universal egalitarianism; they were qualified by nationality. Only Communism is a squarely anti-privatist form of Socialism. Nazism follows the Socialist thought the likes the anti-mercantilists with other ideas like from John Maynard Keynes, they certainly were anti-bourgeois. The original definition of a socialist government was one in which government was organized for a certain functional task instead of for profit, where earning is redistributed, not held in common; now however nearly all definitions of Socialism are the Marxist one of public ownership, a transitional stage between Capitalism & Communism. The only ones who believe this are Communists however, pure Socialists don't believe in the Communist definition of theirselves as a state stepping stone to Communism, those who call themselves Socialist in critique of Communism's apparent historical Statism do not understand Communism either, even the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) did not consider their State government a Communism but a Socialism run by a 'Communist' minded party. A Socialist government with a Socialist minded party can in theory be, and has historically (Nazism) been, against Communism; i.e. egalitarian for the blind sake of being egalitarian and not for a functional government operation or goal orientation for the greatening of some pursuit, such as a pure race. Nazism opposed class structure in favor of caste & race structure, Nazism was Socialism and not Fascism as it is commonly considered. Fascism favored the class system, and both philosophies behind each system admired their shared views on the benefits of war, outside of that, they ideologically & functionally share next to nothing in common, Fascist Italy centralized rule of their districts, Nazi Germany federalized their Gau's into a kind of polycracy. Nazism is introverted Socialism, true Socialism, not Fascism.

And if you do use a picture of Hitler, it can't be one where he's wearing the swastika arm-band.thats not a lot of pictures is itFor a flag, you presumably do some image manipulation to get it on the flag in the first place. Airbrush the sleeve. If you can't, surely someone can do that relatively simple task for you.

yes but what if a paticular nation is well established, and decides it is in order for a change of governments?

The rule is fairly explicit. "No exceptions".

Sorry. Besides, you can use swastikas in posts in the RP forums. You can't use them as flags. And that will not change. And should not change. AND YOU ARE ALL FOOLS FOR THINKING IT WILL! BWAHAHAHAHA!

Besides, the Swastika is just a symbol...use something else, for God's sake! Make up your own evil symbol of death for RP, unless you're rping in a WW2+ timeline or are running a nations of Germans...

I am not a fan of fascism, or a supporter of Hitler. But censorship is one of the tools that Hitler and others like him have used in the past to control the masses. To censor the swastika because it's controversial is a step that Hitler would have applauded. I'm not saying change it, I just wish that you could admit to your hypocracy.
I admit that my position is hypocritical. I believe in tolerance except where it extends to intolerant ideologies. I don't think this is wrong though. Hitler discriminated against everyone that disagreed, in addition to all the other groups. I don't do that.

why was the swastika used by the nazis in the first place :confused:

They were Socialist just not post-Marx Socialist (Communist) Socialism isn't the same as Communism. They were anti-Communist Socialists, they believed in a controlled redistribution and urban renewal / public ordinance, not universal egalitarianism; they were qualified by nationality. Only Communism is a squarely anti-privatist form of Socialism. Nazism follows the Socialist thought the likes the anti-mercantilists with other ideas like from John Maynard Keynes, they certainly were anti-bourgeois. The original definition of a socialist government was one in which government was organized for a certain functional task instead of for profit, where earning is redistributed, not held in common; now however nearly all definitions of Socialism are the Marxist one of public ownership, a transitional stage between Capitalism & Communism. The only ones who believe this are Communists however, pure Socialists don't believe in the Communist definition of theirselves as a state stepping stone to Communism, those who call themselves Socialist in critique of Communism's apparent historical Statism do not understand Communism either, even the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) did not consider their State government a Communism but a Socialism run by a 'Communist' minded party. A Socialist government with a Socialist minded party can in theory be, and has historically (Nazism) been, against Communism; i.e. egalitarian for the blind sake of being egalitarian and not for a functional government operation or goal orientation for the greatening of some pursuit, such as a pure race. Nazism opposed class structure in favor of caste & race structure, Nazism was Socialism and not Fascism as it is commonly considered. Fascism favored the class system, and both philosophies behind each system admired their shared views on the benefits of war, outside of that, they ideologically & functionally share next to nothing in common, Fascist Italy centralized rule of their districts, Nazi Germany federalized their Gau's into a kind of polycracy. Nazism is introverted Socialism, true Socialism, not Fascism.

I could tell you how wrong you are, but it'd take me hours and hours and hours. And I'd have to go find my essay. And get into the library to bring out a copy of Mein Kampf, and that's a god-awful book.

So, I'll content myself with saying 'wrong'. And leave it very happily at that.

By using it on an internet nation simulation you keep the Swastika sacrosanct? I heartily disagree.

So do I, so we agree. If you're confused read my post you responded to with this again.

Wait, wait, wait...

So you can have a flag of the SS, the group of muderers that carried out the genocide that made the swastika the symbol of hate that it's known for...

But you can't have a flag of the swastika...

Now that's interesting...

I could tell you how wrong you are, but it'd take me hours and hours and hours. And I'd have to go find my essay. And get into the library to bring out a copy of Mein Kampf, and that's a god-awful book.

So, I'll content myself with saying 'wrong'. And leave it very happily at that.

I've been studying National Socialism for 11 years. Mein Kampf was not a treatise on National Socialism, it was a propaganda auto-biography. Martin Heidegger might be a better start from a existential philosophical view, and they are plenty of other political ideologues of National Socialism in it's contemporary time. In our contemporary time however, it's been a good propaganda move to deny it had any theory, but if believed is pure ignorance.

I personally don't consider the SS as humans. they had no emotions or feelings for anyone and killed with no mercy, all the had to do was pull the trigger or press a button and the life would be gone :sniper:

The symbol was abused by actual Nazis, and so was disallowed. The Hammer and Sickle are much more tongue in cheek in their use here, but if militant Communists started using it, then it would be banned, or that is my understanding. Presumably if there were a symbol associated with al-Qaeda, that would be banned aswell.

With the number of nations here, it would be impossible to analyse every swastika flag, clockwise or counter-clockwise, to determine whether it was being used in good faith or not. Since there was evidence of a large misuse of the symbol, it was banned outright.

Hmmm, it's enough to write the word "Svastyka" and immediatly a large discussion appears... though maybe discussion is a wrong word it's more like a few people giving a rant.
Anyway, yes, the svastyka along with any national socialist ideals or symbols are illegal in pretty much all the world (where it isn't you can oficially use them, though yould propably get linched by some pacifists or commies)
Which, in my humble opinion, is absurd. Symbols are not evil, only the people using them. Just becouse they're using a svastyka in their non-existing countries flag doesn't mean he is or is going to be a Hitler, it would be a different matter if he would make a political party proclaiming the ideal's, though telling neo-nazis only claim a select few of the ideals written in Mein Kampf.

Back to the topic, If a symbol is to be banned simply becouse a whacko murdered a few people than the first to be banned should be anything related with communism, simple logic seeing that Nazis during their twelve years of rule murdered about 6 million people in most of europe, while communists in three years in just ukraine murdered 10 million.
Apart from that any symbols of Islam, Judaizm (as any pacifist will tell you while protesting against Izreals actions in palestine)
and the list would go on and on....

I personally don't consider the SS as humans. they had no emotions or feelings for anyone and killed with no mercy, all the had to do was pull the trigger or press a button and the life would be gone :sniper:
Ah, but the catch is that they were, and that other people can become just like them.

I personally don't consider the SS as humans. they had no emotions or feelings for anyone and killed with no mercy, all the had to do was pull the trigger or press a button and the life would be gone :sniper:
a real person would take into consideration what they had done and the consequenses. Feelings or thinking what others would do makes us human

Hmmm, it's enough to write the word "Svastyka" and immediatly a large discussion appears... though maybe discussion is a wrong word it's more like a few people giving a rant.
Anyway, yes, the svastyka along with any national socialist ideals or symbols are illegal in pretty much all the world (where it isn't you can oficially use them, though yould propably get linched by some pacifists or commies)
Which, in my humble opinion, is absurd. Symbols are not evil, only the people using them. Just becouse they're using a svastyka in their non-existing countries flag doesn't mean he is or is going to be a Hitler, it would be a different matter if he would make a political party proclaiming the ideal's, though telling neo-nazis only claim a select few of the ideals written in Mein Kampf.

Back to the topic, If a symbol is to be banned simply becouse a whacko murdered a few people than the first to be banned should be anything related with communism, simple logic seeing that Nazis during their twelve years of rule murdered about 6 million people in most of europe, while communists in three years in just ukraine murdered 10 million.
Apart from that any symbols of Islam, Judaizm (as any pacifist will tell you while protesting against Izreals actions in palestine)
and the list would go on and on....
Unlike all those others, the Nazis did it industrially.

I admit that my position is hypocritical. I believe in tolerance except where it extends to intolerant ideologies. I don't think this is wrong though. Hitler discriminated against everyone that disagreed, in addition to all the other groups. I don't do that.

Still, though. You cannot be tolerant except in the face of intolerance. It completely voids your claim to tolerance. You cannot have a rule and have exceptions to it, it changes the entire definition. Hitler did not discriminate against everyone that disagreed, that is a very broad and general statement. Hitler wasn't Aryan, he wasn't German. You obviously claim to have some concept of what is right and what is wrong, and you have decided that Hitler was wrong merely because he was discriminatory, racist, a biggot - a very judgemental person who lashed out against those that "disagreed". It's a double standard for you to judge Hitler on the basis that he judged others. Unless you actually are Hitler yourself, I will never believe that you know what went through his head while doing what he did. For all you know, he could have been a saint. He was Christian- Christians believe two things fundamentally. You have heaven and hell. You go to Heaven if you were good, or if you didn't have the chance to be good, or whatever. Babies and nice people are in heaven. Hell is for the badasses who went around and broke god's laws. You go to hell if you committed mortal sins- to commit those, you do something wrong, it was seriously wrong, you knew it was wrong, and you chose to do it anyway. What if Hitler killed all those people to send them up to heaven, knowing that he would be hated by his fellow man and that he would rot in hell forever after. Hitler just sacrificed not only his happiness on earth but also his afterlife so that those people could live happily ever after in heaven with god. And if they were badasses then they go to hell anyway. That makes Hitler one to have a bigger sacrifice than Jesus Christ. It's a ludacris argument to make, but you cannot logically dispute it. You cannot prove that it isn't what happened; it's just that no one wants to think that it did. Basically my point is to not judge people, you really haven't got a clue.

why was the swastika used by the nazis in the first place :confused:

It became popular before WWI as a symbol of Donar (the German Thor) because of many occult lodges that were springing up, and it came to mean Nationalism. When Communists made a makeshift government in Bavaria, the German Freikorps had Swastikas emblazoned on their helmets, so Hitler adopted it as a form of Socialism (two es' crossed over one another) with which to fight Communist Socialism, and a symbol that could counter the Hammer & Sickle of the Communists from Russia; basically the same reason he adopted his hair style in reaction to the propaganda picture of Lenin with bald head & goatee.

I've been studying National Socialism for 11 years. Mein Kampf was not a treatise on National Socialism, it was a propaganda auto-biography. Martin Heidegger might be a better start from a existential philosophical view, and they are plenty of other political ideologues of National Socialism in it's contemporary time. In our contemporary time however, it's been a good propaganda move to deny it had any theory, but if believed is pure ignorance.

No. Stop. Bad monkey. You're now claiming that because National Socialism existed before Hitler, it had nothing to do with him.

Well...I'm sorry. But... (according to Alan Bullock, in his excellent book 'Hitler: A Study in Tyranny') Hitler had taken complete control of the ideaological and theoretical side of the party before 1924. National Socialism, after Hitler became completely in charge, became a Fascist Party based on Hitler's ideals in Mein Kampf.

I couldn't give a fuck what the National Socialist Party prior to Hitler taking command thought, because it's irrelevant.

I'll repeat myself, shall I?

SWASTIKAS ARE NOT ALLOWED AS FLAGS. NO, IT DOESN'T MATTER IF ITS A REVERSE SWASTIKA OR NOT. NO, DON'T BRING UP TIRED OLD ARGUMENTS ABOUT THE RED STAR AND THE HAMMER-AND-SICKLE. THEY DON'T MATTER EITHER.

THE SWASTIKA HAS BEEN BANNED FROM FLAGS, REMAINS BANNED FROM FLAGS, AND WILL CONTINUE TO BE BANNED ON FLAGS. AS FAR AS I KNOW, THE MODERATORS HAVE RULED IT 'NOT DEBATABLE'. SORRY...WELL, NOT REALLY.

I've been studying National Socialism for 11 years. Mein Kampf was not a treatise on National Socialism, it was a propaganda auto-biography. Martin Heidegger might be a better start from a existential philosophical view, and they are plenty of other political ideologues of National Socialism in it's contemporary time. In our contemporary time however, it's been a good propaganda move to deny it had any theory, but if believed is pure ignorance.
If Mein Kampf wasn't a treatise on National Socialist Ideology, then the Nazis weren't National Socialists, because Mein Kampf is what they happened to be based on. If you've studied National Socialism for eleven years, you should know that.

No. Stop. Bad monkey. You're now claiming that because National Socialism existed before Hitler, it had nothing to do with him.

Well...I'm sorry. But... (according to Alan Bullock, in his excellent book 'Hitler: A Study in Tyranny') Hitler had taken complete control of the ideaological and theoretical side of the party before 1924. National Socialism, after Hitler became completely in charge, became a Fascist Party based on Hitler's ideals in Mein Kampf.

I couldn't give a fuck what the National Socialist Party prior to Hitler taking command thought, because it's irrelevant.

Where did I say National Socialism existed before Hitler? I never even implied it. In forms it did, but that's not the form I am addressing. Check out a Cambridge University Press book called "The Racial State." Hitler took the Fascist Dialectical ideas, "actualism" and merged Socialism with them, from which National Socialism (the words Hitler himself used to qualify the German Workers Party) came to a head.

anyone else want to add

If Mein Kampf wasn't a treatise on National Socialist Ideology, then the Nazis weren't National Socialists, because Mein Kampf is what they happened to be based on. If you've studied National Socialism for eleven years, you should know that.

No, it wasn't what it was based on. Hitler's National Socialism existed before Mein Kampf. Yes, Nazi Germany had a cult of personality, yes, Mein Kampf came to have an almost sacred symbolic importance, did it contain the methodology to National qualified introverted Socialism that they practiced to reach the ideas put forth there? No. It contained an amalgamation of popular prejudices put in a way for mass consumption, even Hitler told his closest subordinates that reading it was unnecessary & pointless, and it was even outdated for the populace before the breakout of war. It laid out a rough draft against thing, but not the ways in which society was to be worked out once those were 'done away with' and the ways in which "acceptable national elements" were to inter-relate with one another socially. Nazism did have this, and it had this outside & beyond Gregor Strasser.

Where did I say National Socialism existed before Hitler? I never even implied it. In forms it did, but that's not the form I am addressing. Check out a Cambridge University Press book called "The Racial State." Hitler took the Fascist Dialectical ideas, "actualism" and merged Socialism with them, from which National Socialism (the words Hitler himself used to qualify the German Workers Party) came to a head.

...No, you see, that's where the problem is. Hitler was not Mussolini. He had little training in Marxist literature. And what do you mean, 'fascism is about class-structures'?

Mussolini was a revolutionary. He only abided with the Monarchy because he wanted continued support from the common people. He only tolerated the Church and concluded the Lateran pact so that the Italian Catholics would fall in behind him. His ideals were just as revolutionary/reactionary as Hitler's. The only difference between the two was Nazism's spurious base on 'race and nation', as opposed to just nation.

In economics, Hitler was very capitalist. Coca-Cola sponsored him and followed his conquests with his own...he let the companies run rough-shod over the forcibly de-unionised workers...at least Mussolini set up 'Corporations' to form some sort of worker protection. Hitler even eliminated the 'Socialist' wing of his own party in favour of the Nationalist Military.

Now, what the hell does this have to do with the swastika being banned?

BTW, Hitler himself picked out the Swastika design. It was not a National Socialist symbol before him. He picked it out, he chose the colours, he reversed it, and he gave it that little 'tilt'. He thought it looked dynamic.

Nazism is introverted Socialism, true Socialism, not Fascism.

To my knowledge, "true Socialism" is not the same as National Socialism. True Socialism entails that everyone is treated equally, not just one particular "race".

No, it wasn't what it was based on. Hitler's National Socialism existed before Mein Kampf. Yes, Nazi Germany had a cult of personality, yes, Mein Kampf came to have an almost sacred symbolic importance, did it contain the methodology to National qualified introverted Socialism that they practiced to reach the ideas put forth there? No. It contained an amalgamation of popular prejudices put in a way for mass consumption, even Hitler told his closest subordinates that reading it was unnecessary & pointless, and it was even outdated for the populace before the breakout of war. It laid out a rough draft against thing, but not the ways in which society was to be worked out once those were 'done away with' and the ways in which "acceptable national elements" were to inter-relate with one another socially. Nazism did have this, and it had this outside & beyond Gregor Strasser.
Yes, it was. Hitler's racist policies and anti-communist arguments were written down in his book. I have not read it, because it happens to be illegal in Germany, but I know that it was the first big documentation of his "Lebensraum" plans and the racist ideals of an aryan state.

[QUOTE=RoaniaHe only tolerated the Church and concluded the Lateran pact so that the Italian Catholics would fall in behind him. [/QUOTE]
Hitler did not tolerate the church. There were plenty of Protestants and Catholics that found their way into the concentration camps for being christian. The only church he tolerated that I know of was the Church of German Christians, which considered him the Messiah. The youth organizations of the churches were severely reduced. It was forbidden to gather for any reasons other than religious purposes. I would not consider this as tolerant.

...No, you see, that's where the problem is. Hitler was not Mussolini. He had little training in Marxist literature. And what do you mean, 'fascism is about class-structures'?

Mussolini was a revolutionary. He only abided with the Monarchy because he wanted continued support from the common people. He only tolerated the Church and concluded the Lateran pact so that the Italian Catholics would fall in behind him. His ideals were just as revolutionary/reactionary as Hitler's. The only difference between the two was Nazism's spurious base on 'race and nation', as opposed to just nation.

In economics, Hitler was very capitalist. Coca-Cola sponsored him and followed his conquests with his own...he let the companies run rough-shod over the forcibly de-unionised workers...at least Mussolini set up 'Corporations' to form some sort of worker protection. Hitler even eliminated the 'Socialist' wing of his own party in favour of the Nationalist Military.

Now, what the hell does this have to do with the swastika being banned?

BTW, Hitler himself picked out the Swastika design. It was not a National Socialist symbol before him. He picked it out, he chose the colours, he reversed it, and he gave it that little 'tilt'. He thought it looked dynamic.

Hitler was economically Keynesian, he formed the Labor Front long after the NBO was made ineffective. All Nazi officials spoke out against Capitalism (in the sense used in the 2nd Ed Oxford English Dictionary, an older, and more proper definition fitting the times then) Survivals of Privatism existed, but what does this have to do with Socialism? Such a thing only runs against the pre-tenses of Communism and how Communism has come to define Socialism since the cold war. Hitler took the Swastika from the old soldier, Junkers, and the Freikorps who used it prominently before & during WWI, it was a symbol in place in German politics among bohemians, and maybe it was from the Thule Society led by Dietrich Eckhardt (who Mein Kampf is dedicated to). Nazism didn't proclaim Corporate Syndicalism like Italy, but Italy never actually implemented it. Hitler created more direct, station specific, welfare programs than nearly any other nation of the era, especially the Soviet Union. Fascism's basis was acceptance of Class structure, and giving each class their place. Mussolini was a complete reactionary to his formerly held Socialist beliefs. Hitler however used the Dialectical Actualist method to make a synthesis between Nationalism & Socialism as a form of collective National social engineering, Fascism never did this, it only put forth the pretense where it could be done.

It has nothing to do with the Swastika banned, I am only responded to thought put forth first by others.

To my knowledge, "true Socialism" is not the same as National Socialism. True Socialism entails that everyone is treated equally, not just one particular "race".

To better qualify my statement, the suffixal "-Socialism" in National-Socialism meant 'just socialism,' i.e. pure Socialism, not Communism, which is universal egalitarianism. Socialism, i.e. "Just" Socialism, qualified with 'Nationalism' (and not Internationalist Socialism without stateless Communism) was exactly what the Nazis had, not pro-class Fascism.

He only tolerated the Church and concluded the Lateran pact so that the Italian Catholics would fall in behind him.
Hitler did not tolerate the church. There were plenty of Protestants and Catholics that found their way into the concentration camps for being christian. The only church he tolerated that I know of was the Church of German Christians, which considered him the Messiah. The youth organizations of the churches were severely reduced. It was forbidden to gather for any reasons other than religious purposes. I would not consider this as tolerant.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Creationism/Essays/Hitler.shtml

'In order to generate something more substantive than unreliable hearsay quotes, Hitler's actions or words against political opponents or competing brands of Christianity are almost invariably misrepresented as actions or words against Christianity as a whole. This is simply absurd; if we adopt denominational intolerance or political ruthlessness as the definition of anti-Christian attitudes, then most Christians throughout history have been anti-Christian, including the Roman Catholic church throughout most of its existence!'

Yes, it was. Hitler's racist policies and anti-communist arguments were written down in his book. I have not read it, because it happens to be illegal in Germany, but I know that it was the first big documentation of his "Lebensraum" plans and the racist ideals of an aryan state.

Ideas in line with their German National Socialist thought were put forth, no doubt, but a cohesive theory on general National Socialism did not. Because it did not exist there does not mean that it did not exist in Germany at that time, it existed among the Nazi intelligentsia and there was much put to paper about it. None, or only allusions to, were put into Mein Kampf. Therefore it is not a definitive work on Third Reich National Socialist theory. Most of which is more difficult to find than Fascist thinker's works like Giovani Gentile, Ugo Spirito, Filippo Marinetti, etc.

I also think this is stupid.

As a Polish person I am offended more when I see all the communist symbols here then that of a swastika - why not be fair and not a commie supporter?

He only tolerated the Church and concluded the Lateran pact so that the Italian Catholics would fall in behind him.
Hitler did not tolerate the church. There were plenty of Protestants and Catholics that found their way into the concentration camps for being christian. The only church he tolerated that I know of was the Church of German Christians, which considered him the Messiah. The youth organizations of the churches were severely reduced. It was forbidden to gather for any reasons other than religious purposes. I would not consider this as tolerant.

Here we're speaking of Mussolini, and him giving the Vatican it's own state as to not interfere with Italian Fascism's Totalitarianism. Mussolini was an open atheist before founding the Fascist party, and then became quiet about it. As for Hitler, his views on religion are probably best believed from the records of Bormann's table talks.

As for Hitler, his views on religion are probably best believed from the records of Bormann's table talks.

The records of extremely dubious provenance?

Martin Bormann was Hitler's private secretary and he was non-religious. He wished to make it appear as if Hitler shared his views, and his accounts of Hitler's opinions vary wildly and suspiciously from all others. The actual conversations in "Hitler's Table Talk" were recorded by civil servants Heim and Piker, and the latter complained that "no confidence" could be placed in Bormann's edited versions of them. Bormann took all the manuscripts for himself, produced edited versions, and then destroyed the originals. Given Bormann's suspicious editorial activities, his uncorroborated versions of those conversations cannot be considered credible evidence. Many anti-Christian quotes attributes to Hitler actually came from Bormann himself (for example, Bormann once said that "one can either be a German or a Christian, but not both", and overzealous Christian apologists have widely promoted the "mistaken" impression that the quote came from Hitler himself). He became very close to Hitler by the last days of the war, but by then, Hitler had become quite insane.

I also think this is stupid.

As a Polish person I am offended more when I see all the communist symbols here then that of a swastika - why not be fair and not a commie supporter?
why are you offended when you see a red star or sickle
The Nazis invaded poland and massacred people, thats when the war really started

why are you offended when you see a red star or sickle
The Nazis invaded poland and massacred people, thats when the war really started

Soviets killed more Poles then the nazis- and Poles are closer by culture to Russians - so to kill your own brothers and sisters in the name of a totally idiotic system is worse then some German (which Poles are known to have always fought) coming in and doing his thing.

I get sick when I see anything related to the socialist movements which were inspired by maggots like Marx.

why are you offended when you see a red star or sickle
The Nazis invaded poland and massacred people, thats when the war really started
You are not aware that when the war really started and the Nazis invaded Poland, the Soviets did too and took the other half?

The records of extremely dubious provenance?

Hitler's childhood and later life friends pre-war give the same accounts in their biographies, Certainly nothing is going to be admitted publically or published with his blessings that alienates the majority population of the nation, and would therefore not exist any other way historically outside of interpersonal second party accounts. He loved the concept of the Crusades, and Inquisitions, and thought Charlemagne was strong (and therefore "right") for defeating the Saxons, a belief that others such as Himmler didn't share, but he didn't have a Christian morality outside of such a "might makes right" and he considered any moral Christianity as not the 'positive Christianity' which he espoused. He had no love of neo-paganism or atheistic Communism, he was a utilitarian deist most likely, but again, I admit there is no proof of this sanctioned by officially published sentiment, only from close acquaintances.

You are not aware that when the war really started and the Nazis invaded Poland, the Soviets did too and took the other half?

Exactly!!
I HATE the way people are misinformed about this and the people that are usually misinformed are young pathetic socialists which do not know a thing about what their attempt at Utopia had done to certain countries.

Compare the numbers of victims of Communism worldwide to those of victims of Nazism...I think the reality shows the real aggressors and nazis.

Oh, look. Has it been two months already?

This isn't General. If you want to discuss Hitler's views, the history of Nazism, et cetera, do it there.

The rule is not going to be lifted. Max Barry banned the swastica (for flags) on NationStates. There is no higher authority. Most people are able to accept this and go on with their lives. I'm sure Buddists have another image that they can use, and Nazi's have plenty that they can use as well.

This isn't going to change, and we've heard every argument that there is. Furthermore, it's not like the Mods made this rule, or that we have a choice in the matter. This is The Will Of Max.


Can I have anything I want for a flag?

No. We do have a few restrictions on what's an acceptable flag for your nation. All of the rules that apply to what you can post also apply to your flag. You flag can't be obscene, threatening, or break any other of those rules. Flags are held to a higher standard than forum posts because there is no right of reply. Also, your flag cannot contain a swastika.

Why can't I have a swastika on my flag?

The short answer is "Because I said so." The long answer is, well, long. But, in a nutshell the swastika has been banned from flags because it is instrinsically linked in the public consciousness with the Holocaust, it can reasonably be considered offensive for players to appear to endorse it. Also, flags (as noted above) are held to a higher standard than forum posts. Finally, if you would like to argue this ruling, please don't involve us in it. We've heard all of the different arguments including atrocities commited by the communists and other groups, as well as numerous other uses of the swastika not by the Nazi party. The ruling stands. (Note: The reversed swastika is also banned.)