[Avinash_Tyagi]

EU calls for Europe wide ban of the Swastika

I personally oppose the Ban on two grounds the first being that the Swastika is considered a symbol of good and fortune in the East and as such is still widely used by Hindus and Buddhists, among others, as a result a Ban would prevent people who have no connection to Nazis, from freely excercising their beliefs.

Secondly even if the Swastika had no positive meaning I would still oppose this Ban because of the idea of freedom of speech, now I'm not certain about the rule of law in Europe, but having spent a very long time in the US I feel that as long as someone does not violate another person's rights they should be free to express themselves, even if they are Nazi's

[Catbert]

The "swastika" was aroung loooooooooong before the nazis came. And no, it shouldn't be banned. Start banning shit outright and what do you get? Nazism again! Way to go.

[Fairygdmther]

I have to say that I'm on the fence about this. The swastika is a symbol of the terror, and power of the Third Reich - and as such, it causes many people a great deal of distress. I, too, hate to see censorship, and banning, but perhaps in this case, it is the right thing to do.

A few southern US states were still using a confederate flag in their statehouses a few years ago. A huge big deal was made of this and that it glorifies a time when Blacks were slaves. They have been made to remove them because of the distress it causes.

Perhaps when the item in question is SO onerous to people, or a group of people, that the symbolism needs to be looked at and judged on an individual basis. There's no question that both of these things are symbols of a very distressing era. Consideration of people's feelings, at least when the subject matter is wide-spread and very negative, is possibly the best approach here.

FGM

[EasilyConfused]

Originally Posted by Fairygdmther

A few southern US states were still using a confederate flag in their statehouses a few years ago. A huge big deal was made of this and that it glorifies a time when Blacks were slaves. They have been made to remove them because of the distress it causes.FGM

They haven't been MADE to remove them. There is no law that says that states can't fly these things. There is the pressure of public opinion, and the consensus that this is not the right thing to do. There is a huge difference between banning something legally, which says that no one can ever use the symbol either in protest of it or in a historical context (see the interview with Chris Kellner and the difficulties they encountered with Nibiru) and a societal taboo, as we talked about ages ago in another thread. The latter is simply social pressure not to use these things, and is something I think happens whatever the law itself might say. I agree that people should be considerate, but I think that at least in the United States, there shouldn't be a legal ban on any symbol.

Edit: Oops, except on public endorsement of religious symbols. Long story. Must come back to this post.

[Avinash_Tyagi]

Originally Posted by Fairygdmther

I have to say that I'm on the fence about this. The swastika is a symbol of the terror, and power of the Third Reich - and as such, it causes many people a great deal of distress. I, too, hate to see censorship, and banning, but perhaps in this case, it is the right thing to do.

A few southern US states were still using a confederate flag in their statehouses a few years ago. A huge big deal was made of this and that it glorifies a time when Blacks were slaves. They have been made to remove them because of the distress it causes.

Perhaps when the item in question is SO onerous to people, or a group of people, that the symbolism needs to be looked at and judged on an individual basis. There's no question that both of these things are symbols of a very distressing era. Consideration of people's feelings, at least when the subject matter is wide-spread and very negative, is possibly the best approach here.

FGM

But the problem IMO is that not everyone views it negatively, in fact i'd say its rather split as its' viewed in a good light in Asia, as its a symbol of good in many eastern cultures.

So wouldn't Banning it spite one group just to placate another?

[Wormsie]

No ban. Besides, it makes easier to tell normal people from nazis that way...

[Erkki]

My opinion is somewhere between FGM and Avinash. And part of me thinks the response to prince Harry's costume thing was way overreacted. On the other hand, he is a public figure and should be careful of such things.

But if it was banned, then how banned? Should works of art that have this symbol also be banned?

[Catbert]

Originally Posted by Fairygdmther

I have to say that I'm on the fence about this. The swastika is a symbol of the terror, and power of the Third Reich - and as such, it causes many people a great deal of distress. I, too, hate to see censorship, and banning, but perhaps in this case, it is the right thing to do.

A few southern US states were still using a confederate flag in their statehouses a few years ago. A huge big deal was made of this and that it glorifies a time when Blacks were slaves. They have been made to remove them because of the distress it causes.

Perhaps when the item in question is SO onerous to people, or a group of people, that the symbolism needs to be looked at and judged on an individual basis. There's no question that both of these things are symbols of a very distressing era. Consideration of people's feelings, at least when the subject matter is wide-spread and very negative, is possibly the best approach here.

FGM

I don't like you! you're gay! let's ban the gays!

I don't like you! you're black! let's ban the blacks!

I don't like you! you're whatever! let's ban whatever!

Start with an example and you can ban everything you can think of. Nazis, no matter how stupid their beliefs are, can and should be allowed to express themselves in any way they want.

[Avinash_Tyagi]

Ganesh is the Hindu elephant-headed god, Ganesha (or Ganesh) is known (by various names in different parts of India and on different occasions) as the Remover of Obstacles, the god of domestic harmony and of success. He is the most beloved and revered of all the Hindu gods, and is always invoked first in any Hindu ceremony or festival. He is the son of Parvati (the wife of Shiva, the Destroyer). There are many stories about how Ganesha got his elephant head, and about his exploits and antics. He was created as an ordinary boy, but was decapitated in battle. Shiva's emissaries were sent into the forest and told to get the head of the first animal they found and to fit that head onto the boy's neck. They found a little elephant, and it worked!

Note the prescense of the Swastika on his palm.

[RLacey]

Whilst the presence of the Swastika is undoubtedly offensive to some groups of people, and, to some Germans, a symbol of deep embarrasment due to its power as a reminder of the Nazis, to ban its use, even if allowed for the loose term of 'education', could be seen as an attempt to obliterate the past - arguably in a manner no better than the censorship of photographs in, say, Communist Russia. I agree that its use in many cases is tasteless, but so are many things in life. Banning it would, in my opinion, be another example of political correctness gone mad.

I hasten to add, though, that I don't approve of the use of the Swastika in a deliberate attempt to cause offence.

[Catbert]

Nevermind that. A war veteran that saw his friends die in war for democracy gets disturbed and wants the symbol banned. Don't mind the fact that he's doing what he fought against and causes him to wake up at night in cold sweat crying, the man just hates the symbol.

[UPtimist]

Well, as people have said, it's originally had quite a different meaning, and still has nowadays, and even though it is still used in quite tasteless and offensive meanings, there's no reason to ban a (at least this) symbol in my opinion...

[100ja a.k.a. mr_mitja]

This is rather silly if you ask me. I can see why people want to ban it though...
I'll try to keep this short. Here in CRO a few years ago the goverment banned everything (t-shirts, caps, flags...) that had marijuana leaf on them. Suddenly you couldn't buy Eminem t-shirts anywhere, they tried to confiscate everything. Later on, they banned the fascist symbols (by the way none of this didn't really work, cause the police didn't act on it as they should have, by the law). Now they're trying to ban or communistic sybols too. As a man who has probably 50% commie menswear I strongly oppose to this. I wear those for my personal reasons. I was born in a commie state, and although I am aware of the negative sides of that regime, people generally think that the life back then was much better, capitalism kinda screwed all of us. So do I. Life was "peaches" before, we had Disney cartoons and stolen movies on TV, the best music was made (in ex-Yugoslavia) in the 80's and with "Goodby Lenin" it the whole lifestyle became popular again. If someone is offended seeing me on the streets, he can always look the other way, it ain't like I'm going to beat him up or propagate the regime and dispense Mao's little red books. I am just being nostalgic.

If we go that far, we will start banning everything. The gay flags (there still are way to many people saying that it's a disease and that it threatens mankind), crucifixes (the crusades anyone?), books, art. To ban something means to be narrow-minded and ignorant...

[Maquisard]

Heh, you find nostalgia in the weirdest of places... I've pretty much dealt with the fact that Yugoslavia was a huge mistake, and that everyone would've been better off if the union of the southern Slavs never had happened. But, to each his own.

[Manhunter71]

Originally Posted by Catbert

I don't like you! you're gay! let's ban the gays!

I don't like you! you're black! let's ban the blacks!

I don't like you! you're whatever! let's ban whatever!

Start with an example and you can ban everything you can think of. Nazis, no matter how stupid their beliefs are, can and should be allowed to express themselves in any way they want.

Surely you don't mean that literally?? If so, you are saying that it is perfectly fine for the Nazis to slaughter millions of innocent people

Sure - everyone should be allowed their own ideas and freedom of speech, but to say they should be allowed to express their beliefs however they want is to promote anarchy!!!

[Catbert]

Originally Posted by Manhunter71

Surely you don't mean that literally?? If so, you are saying that it is perfectly fine for the Nazis to slaughter millions of innocent people

Sure - everyone should be allowed their own ideas and freedom of speech, but to say they should be allowed to express their beliefs however they want is to promote anarchy!!!

No, it's to promote democracy. As long as they don't kill or hurt anyone or any property, they can yell in the streets that they have tiny dicks and hate black folk for all I care. People only join in if they want, it's not like we're sheep, and banning it is against all democracy stands for. I'm sorry, but you can't contest me. For ONCE in my life, I'm 100% right.

Damn, never thought I'd say that.

[Manhunter71]

Originally Posted by Catbert

No, it's to promote democracy. As long as they don't kill or hurt anyone or any property, they can yell in the streets that they have tiny dicks and hate black folk for all I care. People only join in if they want, it's not like we're sheep, and banning it is against all democracy stands for. I'm sorry, but you can't contest me. For ONCE in my life, I'm 100% right.

Damn, never thought I'd say that.

Sorry, maybe I misunderstood you - it's just that when you said they should be able to express their feelings anyway they want I assumed violence and mass murder was included in that!

I'm all for free speech - its when it goes that one step further that I have a problem with it!

So, yes you are right - but I am too!

[100ja a.k.a. mr_mitja]

Originally Posted by Mares

Heh, you find nostalgia in the weirdest of places...

I can't help myself (and I have to disagree with you on that other thing you said, but I'm not going to change this thread to ex-YU pros & cons. Don't think that would be fair to the rest of the community )

[AFGNCAAP]

The idea of democracy taken to the extreme would have no way of fighting against anarchism or populism. Catbert says "it's not like we're sheep", and I'd love to agree, but with time I am less and less sure of that.

Yet... banning the symbols? It's just... weird (actually the interview with Chris Kellner reminded me of playing German version of Indiana Jones - Nazis with black squares on their shoulders were a surreal experience, really).

[Catbert]

Alright I'll rephrase it then. I'm not a sheep.