cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/01 … rss_latest
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/01/17/hindu.swastika.reut/index.html
Yeah. That’s brilliant. As much as I wish people here would not use Nazi flags to display the swastika, I think banning a VERY OLD symbol of peace because it was used by one country to symbolize hate for less than a century is… well… nuts.
I also find deep irony in the idea of restricting the rights of a religious group in order to protect a religious group from idiots.
Lets be realistic here, what do you think most people in Europe will be using swastikas for, and what do you think it represents to most people.
I’m fairly sure all the Buddhists in Europe would agree that the swastika is an unnecessary addition to their faith. If you’ve ever been to Eastern Europe, you will know that anti-semitism is still strong there.
“Most people”…
Between the Hindus and the Chinese it is a religious symbol to most people.
I’m well aware that anti-sematism is strong in parts of eastern Europe. I’ve had to deal with it here from some of those types. But what it means to them is not the universal meaning. And telling a religious group that they can not display the symbol of their religion is oppression. So oppressing a people to get a bunch of morons to not display what they consider a symbol of oppression is counterproductive.
Does seem wrong to ban those who came up with the symbol from using it for it’s original purpose just because a bunch of yahoos borrowed, bent, and buggered it.
My feeling is that banning something makes it more attractive to those timewarp nazi freaks. But I’m British and I only lost family in air raids, not in camps, and my grandparents didn’t have this symbol of death flying in their streets, so it’s not my battle.
Many European countries have laws against misuse of the swastika as a nazi symbol or laws against inciting racial hatred. The nazi flag is not simply a swastika, it is inverted and black on a white circle with a red background. It’s never acceptable to display that. Religious swastikas are not inverted so I’m not clear what the Hindu argument is.
On the other hand, any religion should be big enough to concede that whether the symbol was misused or not, it really does hurt people who lost family or were brutalised themselves under this symbol to see it. I’m not saying it should be banned, but saying it was misused doesn’t take away its power to shock and upset. You can’t intellectualise gut fear and disgust.
It’s not really an EU issue, though, it’s something for member countries to decide for themselves. To impose a cultural standard on the whole of Europe seems heavy handed.
My grandmother had tattoos from those camps. And I have many a relative that died way before my birth from that war. But that war was a stain in time on an otherwise peaceful symbol.
Blank
Unfortunately most Germans only know the swastika as a Nazi symbol. I would not mind if the “Nazi swastika” could somehow be defined and banned, but the idea for a European-wide ban of any swastika (as it seems) is probably just a matter of ignorance and not thinking this through.
Possibly because thats ONLY how the symbol is used…
Right, but we’re not alking about India and China, we’re talking about Europe. I’m well aware that there are Hindus and Chinese living in Europe, but I hardly think banning them from using a symbol is oppression…as they are entitled to practice their beliefs.
What I am against however is the religious freedom entitled to Muslims in Australia, allowing them to mutilate women via “circumcision”. THATS oppression.
How do you mean that?
Errr…doesn’t the buddhist one go the other way?
Nazi
Buddhist
Snow & Snot, Chalk & Cheese
Or are they banning all regarless of direction? Insensitive bastards :raspberry:
Yes it does. And it always has.
I’ve just been waiting for someone to mention this rather significant fact.
added:10:20
Most of the time but not in every case.
Most neo nazis now use the black sun and not the swastika these days. Because the swastika was banned in Germany they started to use the balck sun.
Isn’t it just a case of ban this and they move onto to something else.
If you don’t know what a black sun is, it was an adapted pagan symbol modified and used by Himmler instead of, or in addition to to swastika.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sun_(occult_symbol
I mentioned it on the first page. You have me on ‘ignore’ TC? (I always read your posts! 
)
Dear Cup O’ Butter (saw this elsewhere - liked it) -
I do not have you on ignore. Your bright sunny disposition gives no reason for that!
My apologies. I did not notice your mentioning this.
(my ignore function doesn’t seem to work anyway - I put 'em on ignore and I still see their whiney crap on my screen)
Banning the symbol an oppressive group uses will in no way stop that group.
The ban that has been suggested would ban ALL swastikas, not just the nazi ones. I don’t see how you don’t see this as having rights taken away. If Christians were told they could not use a cross, they would have an uproar. But Christians are the majority, so they are safe from this sort of thing. And don’t try to say that the cross has never been used for genocide, oppression, and war. Because it has many, many, many more times than the swastika.
totally agree
Incidentally the original Christian symbol was the “two fish” taken from pagan and greek origins and not the cross. The cross was far later, and was used as the Christian symbol by the first Christian Roman emperor. The cross was used by other “religions” long before the Christians were on the scene. The crucifix is of course purely christian as it is not just an empty cross but has Jesus nailed on it. (I think).
I heard that some areas of Birmingham England were trying to ban department store christmas trees. Local muslims feel that it is inappropriate as it is Christian (pagan actually) and most people in the area are Muslim.
Should this be moved to the international politics forum? Not that I really care.
Ok so Germany have the EU presidency for the next 6 months and what they plan to do is ban all references to the Nazis in every European country. Wearing a swastika is a pretty stupid thing to do and denying the holocaust is pure insanity but should they really be criminalized?
How dare Germany decide how other countries rules on the freedom of speech be applied. The Swiss in their constitution have an absolute right to say what ever they want and the UK already bans the use of racism to incite religious hatred.
I can’t see this becoming legislation, but they have a nerve even suggesting it.
I’d like to weigh in!!
From wikipedia:
The name “sauwastika” is sometimes given to the left-facing, form of the swastika (卍), based on D’Alviella (1894).[5] Indians of all faiths sometimes use the symbol in both orientations mostly for symmetry. Buddhists, outside of India, generally use the left-facing swastika over the right-facing swastika although, again, both can be used. Claims to the effect that the left-facing swastika has inauspicious or “evil” connotations are without substance.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika
just to try to clear up the left/right-facing thing a little.
Also, in Taiwan, I’d like to report that I have seen the Nazi flag for sale in flag-shops in Tainan and Kaohsiung, and I’ve also seen helmets on people and in motorcycle storage baskets that carry a swastika (nazi style) with wings, i.e. the Luftwaffe’s insignia. Interesting how it’s become a totally non-offensive symbol here. The Buddhist one means ‘vegetarian food sold here’ on most maps, and the nazi logo has little impact. Kinda like how lots of people wear big pot leaf images on shirts without having a clue what it means. It’s just a fashion statement.