Which part is illegal? The historic artifact bit or the Nazi bit? It seems weird to have so many resources dedicated to tracking down someone collecting hour glasses and statues.
A few million people died under that misappropriated symbol though. It sucks you can't use it for its intended message anymore, but most peoples' sympathies lie elsewhere.
A few times a few at least, and that’s only counting extermination in the KZ’s and VZ’s. If you consider the total casualties of the war, including combat deaths (even German) and civilian casualties outside of the camps, it’s more in the realm of 50-80 million. Subtract 3-5 million for the Pacific theater, and it’s still a lot.
It also doesn’t help that neo-Nazis work today under the same banner.
Hitler was also against smoking. His message resonated with people and caused them to kill. Maybe if he wasn't against smoking people wouldn't have followed him
The cross is a sign of solidarity for supporters of one particular person who died on it, not as a sign of solidarity for the people who put him on it.
Sorry, but to the western world it is a symbol of genocide and a dark time in history, it will never be reclaimed. No one cares about the previous history of the symbol, it is forever tarnished.
I respectfully disagree. I had family members killed by the Nazis and I care about the swastika being reclaimed, at least in the sense that it should be common knowledge that it was a misappropriated religious symbol. For some folks, the understanding stops at “swastika = Nazi”.
By that rational we should also hate churches -- they after all have crosses on them and those have been appropriated by groups like the clan to project a message of hate.
You’re getting downvotes but I think it’s unwarranted. The swastika has a deep and significant history; it would be worthwhile for everyone interested in WW2 history to understand this misappropriated symbol.
I don’t know that it makes a difference to say it but I had family members killed by the Nazis so I’m not detached from the history. That said, I think most people from a Western country could say the same thing.
As a Hindu, this saddens me as well. Even though I’m not religious, it was a symbol of prosperity. I sometimes wonder how centuries of history can be appropriated and misrepresented by one bad actor.
I am a practicing Buddhist and have been for more than a decade. This is complete and utter bullshit and a total misunderstanding of the teaching.
You can be detached and still saddened by what you see in the world. Non attachment is not the same as callousness or numbness. If anything, you feel things more deeply.
What a bullshit excuse to post a swastika on HN, and an attempt to rehabilitate and normalize the symbols of Nazism. The haters always find a way around the rules. The problem with Nazism obviously isn't the loss of this symbol; that's not what needs addressing.
If you read the strategies of the White Christian supremacists, they say not to make statements that others find outrageous but to gently push the envelope and slowly normalize their beliefs. Here, as I said, they are trying to rehabilitate Nazi symbology.
EDIT: In response to below, the problem with Nazism is people like me? Wow. I thought the problem was mass murder, brutal oppression, and an ideology that advocates it. But perhaps it's the poor, persecuted Neo-Nazis, who in another by-the-book rhetorical turn, try to look like victims.
EDIT2: dang: Sure, and let's keep the swastikas off HN. That and the hate speech are the real problems with very serious consequences. When you don't do anything about it, it would be irresponsible for me (or anyone) to stand by and quietly acquiesce. I know it's a hard problem, but burying our heads in the sand is what Facebook does. If you think my claims about what's happening are absurd, talk to someone you trust who knows these things: Certainly in 2018, we can't think propaganda in online forums is at all an absurd prospect.
EDIT3: Perhaps I could have found a cooler way to respond, but it's a pretty inflammatory thing and the commenter, supposedly versed in symbology, knew that it would be. Sorry if I caused any extra headache, but I don't regret pointing out the problem.
> What a bullshit excuse to post a swastika on HN. The haters always find a way around the rules. The problem with Nazism obviously isn't the symbol
Of course the problem isn't the symbol. It's people like you. On one hand you claim that I used an excuse to do something very wrong- post the symbol. And call me a hater. On the other hand you say the problem isn't the symbol.
> Yes. The sadder thing is people not knowing swastika's history and that it is auspicious for almost 2 billion people including me a, a Buddhist.
You, and your fellow Buddhists, need to realize that Hitler had a far more profound impact on Western civilization (unfortunately) than did the Buddha, and that Westerners who recognize the swastika as a symbol of hate do so because for half the world, and most of a century, it has been a symbol of hate.
Those Westerners are not misinformed, or ignorant, or incorrect in doing so, they're interpreting a symbol in the context with which it was introduced to Western culture. You can tell people that it's a misappropriated symbol of peace, but no one in the West is likely ever going to look at a Nazi swastika and see a manji first, even knowing that, any more than Buddhists likely see a manji and think first about Hitler.
> no one in the West is likely ever going to see a Nazi swastika and see a manji first
You're assuming that anti-Holocaust people are going to outlast pro-Holocaust people, but based on history this seems like a questionable assumption. E.g. it took less than 50 years for LoTR to go from an anti-war parable inspired by the horrors of WW1, to being an action movie glorifying indiscriminate killing. Similarly, compare the photos of people standing in front of Auschwitz with the photos that come up in GIS of people standing in front of the Colosseum:
Tolkein said the Lord of the Rings wasn't an anti-war parable or allegory, although that's a valid interpretation, it's wasn't the author's intent. And the books had plenty of war and indiscriminate killing in them, being based as they were on Germanic and European mythologies which considered war a glorious and noble act.
Maybe in a thousand years Westerners will forget about Nazism and the swastika, but it doesn't necessarily follow that they will replace that knowledge with the Buddhist interpretation of the same symbol. Sure, stranger things have happened, it's not impossible, but it seems incredibly unlikely.
It's certainly not going to happen within my lifetime or yours.
1) swastikas usually rotate the opposite direction when used in a buddhist temple, at least in the west, I’ve noticed. Certainly it is useful for differentiating from the most antisemitic symbol of all time.
2) I’m not sure it’s so sad when buddhist is less of an expressive culture and more of internal reflection. That is, I don’t see peoples’ religious beliefs trampled by trying to be respectful to those who do view it as a nazi symbol.
Although I don't believe this is worse than the injustices of generations past, it's certainly sad to witness politics in 2018 contain a plethora of virtue signalling, charades, and ineffectual action. We support the killings of innocents with our military industrial complex, and our media tells us its necessary because otherwise we will lose jobs[1]. Where is the investigation of 500 million missing dollars of charitable relief to Haiti[2]? Not to mention, where is the media coverage of the CLOUD act, and why did congress underhandedly sneak a law that harms Americans rights into a "must pass" omnibus spending bill without[3]? The war on drugs and prison state? Or any of the homeless crises? Unjust and corrupt healthcare and public health? Cities with murder rates higher than anywhere in Africa or the Middle East? Surging suicide rates[4]? And we are just scratching the surface here, and when you get to the bottom there are things you can't even talk about, like human rights for Palestinians[5]
Tyranny, injustice and oppression were not simply eliminated at the end of WWII. And living today to witness the convenient virtue signalling about a historical artifact of a long-defeated tyrant, juxtaposed with the willingness to tolerate current injustice, is really sad.
But isn't that what made Nazi Germany possible? Our willingness to tolerate injustice, so long as it doesn't happen to us? Our desire to follow authority--to serve in the court of despots? That is the irony here, which calls to light the real meaning of this kind of virtue signalling: If we lived under the reign of any of those other tyrants, in Imperial Japan, Nazi Germany, or wherever, would we all suddenly be among activists, not just mere virtue signallers championing the virtues of our leaders?
I don't mean to come down hard on you personally; I just personally wish to see the conversation move away from moral grandstanding to moral responsibility.
is it weird to find them fascinating? I am a millenial and WW2 and its horror is something that I have learnt, but to meet survivors (of holocaust) and surviving items is very exciting.
The injustice aside, I wonder if Nazis fleeing German might have had the side effect of making German reconstruction easier while limiting those who fled into making chocolate in Bariloche under fake names.
Those who fled probably did so for a reason, namely the fear of serious prosecution. They would have had a rather difficult time to continue exerting any influence after '45. It may have had an influence in reducing the number of trials and possibly resentment in the German population, but from what I gather there wasn't ever a risk of widespread open disagreement with the Nuremberg trials etc.
In a certain way, the most significant effect on reconstruction (and de-nazification) may have been their use as a reservoir for prosecutions in later years. The Eichmann trial, for example, had a lasting positive influence for German-Israeli relations, provided us with one of the most meticulously researched accounts of the bureaucrats' guilt, and an excellent treatise on responsibility. In Hannah Arendt's seminal work "The Banality of Evil" it changed the narrative from "Some Germans were evil" to today's "it happened once, so it can happen again".
The dark truth of de-nazification was that large parts of the German upper-middle class almost seamlessly continued their careers after the war. There were simply too many to prosecute them all, or even to shut them out of leadership positions. The rise of the cold war also changed the incentives for the western powers to quickly rebuild the country's economic and political strength. A few hundred or thousands in Argentina simply didn't matter in the grand scale of things.
Also, is there any English-language forum of this size anywhere in the world where one could discuss swastikas (be they Buddhist, Hindu or Nazi) without a flamewar?
I've seen civil discussions on the topic in Chinese forums, where the sensitive topics revolve around Imperial Japan and more recent political issues, but it's doubtful this topic is possible in the western world except in small communities.
50 comments
[ 2.4 ms ] story [ 104 ms ] threadThe sadder thing is people falling over each other to acknowledge it as a hate symbol rather than trying to reclaim it.
How about those of is who actually want to end hate end our comments with this 卐?
It also doesn’t help that neo-Nazis work today under the same banner.
Would you smoke as a protest?
Had the Romans been fond of hanging, Christians might be walking around wearing nooses around their necks.
Edit: the same can be said for Hindus.
I don’t know that it makes a difference to say it but I had family members killed by the Nazis so I’m not detached from the history. That said, I think most people from a Western country could say the same thing.
Why not just let your attachment to that symbol go, and create a new and better one that symbolizes your values?
I want to end hate. And I end my comments with this. }=^={
You can be detached and still saddened by what you see in the world. Non attachment is not the same as callousness or numbness. If anything, you feel things more deeply.
If you read the strategies of the White Christian supremacists, they say not to make statements that others find outrageous but to gently push the envelope and slowly normalize their beliefs. Here, as I said, they are trying to rehabilitate Nazi symbology.
EDIT: In response to below, the problem with Nazism is people like me? Wow. I thought the problem was mass murder, brutal oppression, and an ideology that advocates it. But perhaps it's the poor, persecuted Neo-Nazis, who in another by-the-book rhetorical turn, try to look like victims.
EDIT2: dang: Sure, and let's keep the swastikas off HN. That and the hate speech are the real problems with very serious consequences. When you don't do anything about it, it would be irresponsible for me (or anyone) to stand by and quietly acquiesce. I know it's a hard problem, but burying our heads in the sand is what Facebook does. If you think my claims about what's happening are absurd, talk to someone you trust who knows these things: Certainly in 2018, we can't think propaganda in online forums is at all an absurd prospect.
EDIT3: Perhaps I could have found a cooler way to respond, but it's a pretty inflammatory thing and the commenter, supposedly versed in symbology, knew that it would be. Sorry if I caused any extra headache, but I don't regret pointing out the problem.
Of course the problem isn't the symbol. It's people like you. On one hand you claim that I used an excuse to do something very wrong- post the symbol. And call me a hater. On the other hand you say the problem isn't the symbol.
This sort of flamewar is quite off topic here.
You, and your fellow Buddhists, need to realize that Hitler had a far more profound impact on Western civilization (unfortunately) than did the Buddha, and that Westerners who recognize the swastika as a symbol of hate do so because for half the world, and most of a century, it has been a symbol of hate.
Those Westerners are not misinformed, or ignorant, or incorrect in doing so, they're interpreting a symbol in the context with which it was introduced to Western culture. You can tell people that it's a misappropriated symbol of peace, but no one in the West is likely ever going to look at a Nazi swastika and see a manji first, even knowing that, any more than Buddhists likely see a manji and think first about Hitler.
You're assuming that anti-Holocaust people are going to outlast pro-Holocaust people, but based on history this seems like a questionable assumption. E.g. it took less than 50 years for LoTR to go from an anti-war parable inspired by the horrors of WW1, to being an action movie glorifying indiscriminate killing. Similarly, compare the photos of people standing in front of Auschwitz with the photos that come up in GIS of people standing in front of the Colosseum:
https://www.123rf.com/photo_36629433_happy-mother-and-baby-g...
Maybe in a thousand years Westerners will forget about Nazism and the swastika, but it doesn't necessarily follow that they will replace that knowledge with the Buddhist interpretation of the same symbol. Sure, stranger things have happened, it's not impossible, but it seems incredibly unlikely.
It's certainly not going to happen within my lifetime or yours.
2) I’m not sure it’s so sad when buddhist is less of an expressive culture and more of internal reflection. That is, I don’t see peoples’ religious beliefs trampled by trying to be respectful to those who do view it as a nazi symbol.
You know more were murdered under the guise of the chinese communist flag?
Tyranny, injustice and oppression were not simply eliminated at the end of WWII. And living today to witness the convenient virtue signalling about a historical artifact of a long-defeated tyrant, juxtaposed with the willingness to tolerate current injustice, is really sad.
But isn't that what made Nazi Germany possible? Our willingness to tolerate injustice, so long as it doesn't happen to us? Our desire to follow authority--to serve in the court of despots? That is the irony here, which calls to light the real meaning of this kind of virtue signalling: If we lived under the reign of any of those other tyrants, in Imperial Japan, Nazi Germany, or wherever, would we all suddenly be among activists, not just mere virtue signallers championing the virtues of our leaders?
I don't mean to come down hard on you personally; I just personally wish to see the conversation move away from moral grandstanding to moral responsibility.
1 - https://theintercept.com/2016/09/09/wolf-blitzer-is-worried-...
2 - https://www.npr.org/2015/06/03/411524156/in-search-of-the-re...
3 - https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/03/responsibility-deflect...
4 - https://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/04/22/health/us-suicide-rate...
5 - https://theintercept.com/2018/04/02/israel-killing-palestine...
But on the other hand there was Klaus Barbie.
Those who fled probably did so for a reason, namely the fear of serious prosecution. They would have had a rather difficult time to continue exerting any influence after '45. It may have had an influence in reducing the number of trials and possibly resentment in the German population, but from what I gather there wasn't ever a risk of widespread open disagreement with the Nuremberg trials etc.
In a certain way, the most significant effect on reconstruction (and de-nazification) may have been their use as a reservoir for prosecutions in later years. The Eichmann trial, for example, had a lasting positive influence for German-Israeli relations, provided us with one of the most meticulously researched accounts of the bureaucrats' guilt, and an excellent treatise on responsibility. In Hannah Arendt's seminal work "The Banality of Evil" it changed the narrative from "Some Germans were evil" to today's "it happened once, so it can happen again".
The dark truth of de-nazification was that large parts of the German upper-middle class almost seamlessly continued their careers after the war. There were simply too many to prosecute them all, or even to shut them out of leadership positions. The rise of the cold war also changed the incentives for the western powers to quickly rebuild the country's economic and political strength. A few hundred or thousands in Argentina simply didn't matter in the grand scale of things.
Also, is there any English-language forum of this size anywhere in the world where one could discuss swastikas (be they Buddhist, Hindu or Nazi) without a flamewar?
I've seen civil discussions on the topic in Chinese forums, where the sensitive topics revolve around Imperial Japan and more recent political issues, but it's doubtful this topic is possible in the western world except in small communities.