Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Whaddya all think?
federica
Seeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt Moderator
..There is currently a discussion under way in another forum, regarding the use of the Swastika as a Buddhist symbol. It is also used today, extensively in other disciplines (Hindu, in the main) but of course, in europe, and to an extent, in America the Swastika is cursed with other overtones....
I think we've touched on this subject here before, but as I have found an avatar that seems to fit the bill, I thought I'd put it out for further discussion....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika
I think we've touched on this subject here before, but as I have found an avatar that seems to fit the bill, I thought I'd put it out for further discussion....
- Can the Swastika be 're-instated' as a 'beneficial' symbol?
- Is it a case of constant and repeated exposure doing the trick?
- Is symbolism irrelevant, redundant or unnecessary?
- Does it in fact, cause offence to anyone here?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
The Swastika is only one among many symbols that has been twisted into a new meaning but it does give us an interesting case-study, as your questions suggest, Fede.
First of all, we need to notice that certain symbols have a greater impact on us than others and that the impact is culturally conditioned. It is reported in today's Independent that graffitis are appearing in Australian cities representing the Wandjina, the Aborigine creator deity. This is causing great offence but, to us, is simply a cartoon on a wall.
The Swastika, as a symbol, appears as a decorative motif throughout Hellenic art, designated "Greek key" and we can find it, over and over, in churches and civic buildings. Standing alone and within a European or political context, it has now been almost entirely assimilated to the actions of the German National Socialist Workers' Party (NSDA) during the Third Reich. It has also been adopted by other, post-Nazi extremist groups.
So, in answer to the first question: no reinstatement is conceivable whilst the hooked cross is still used as an active symbol.
The very fact of continued use of and appeal to these symbols makes it self-evident that they carry importance. The burning of US flags, whether at home or by overseas protesters, is a regular part of demonstrations against US policy. The swastika turns up again and again in anti-semitic events.
Personally, I find the use of such symbols, be they swastika, cross, crescent or OM, to be extremely important. They are similar to map symbols, advising and warning. Even though I find some particularly offensive, I would suggest that it is better to have a group waving a flag with an offensive symbol than individuals hiding their allegiances behind their lapels.
I do take some offence to the symbol-only because of what it is associated with-historically speaking.
I say what the Confederate battle flag means Now to so many people trodden down by the history of slavery and its ongoing repercussions is what's important. I see no difference where the swastika is concerned. WHO CARES which direction its arms are pointing?
My heritage is not worth two cents if it affronts the deep sensibilities of other human beings. Nor is anyone else's.
I don't think that it is evil. Evil was done while it was waved as a flag. But this symbol did not ask to be chosen for this association.
Personally - it is still a little shocking and I find myself wondering if it's usage falls within the Eightfold Path. But, this symbol isn't bad all by it's little lonesome.
-bf
In Germany, the swastika is forbidden since it was hijacked by the Nazis. Personally, I`ve given up trying to explain people that it is also a religious symbol. The association is too strong, the conditioning too deep for it to be used as a religious symbol at least in public and now, except you want to have trouble. That`s the way I see it, for Germany at least.
Regards
Palzang
Do you all find the avatar shocking?
Do you think twice, when you see the text beneath it?
What was your first GUT reaction, upon seeing it?
Did the '100% Buddhist' then make you think, or reconsider?
Is it offensive to you?
Personally, I think that - like Life - things are what YOU decide they are.
Incidentally, my original intention, on using this avatar, was not to shock, distress, disgust or appal - it was actually a statement designed to bring something home....
We have posters on here from all over the world. we have all been largely 'conditioned' and influenced by our own culture, social customs and history. I doubt that Ajani views the swastika in the same way we as Westerners do, and may even have his view of it altered, through absorbing comments on this thread.... Might that be constructive, or otherwise?
......I don't know.
my personal slant is that to view the Buddhist Swastika as an altered image of the German symbol of Nazi-ism is back-to-front. It was a Spiritual symbol long before Hitler ever hijacked it.
It's a question of understanding that to view it in a poor light, is only a thought. And a thought can be changed.
It is widely used today in the East, and even appears on maps as an indication of the location of temples....
So the biased viewpoint is a 'Western' problem.
Buddhism has come to the West, and has influenced a massive portion of the population, both in Europe and the Americas.
If we are to embrace a global unity, then we have to adopt some things (which are good) and lay others (which are bad) aside.
Whilst I sincerely hope you all know me well enough now to know that I am in no way seeking to trivialise nor make light of what happened in WWII at the hand of the Nazis, we must not forget that atrocities were perpetrated by other World Powers. However, it seems to be that this is the only symbol to attract such controversy.
There is something which says that, whilst we would do well to remember the events of the past, keepng the animosity alive, by permitting a mere symbol to affect us thus, is a backward step.
Besides, the world has learnt little from the wars, and continues hostilities.....
Just my view.
The argument about which "way round" the hooked cross is drawn is a red herring. You will find both clockwise and anticlockwise examples across the ages and across the world.
No symbol, not even the Christian cross, is so inflammatory as the swastika, which is why it is daubed on synagogues and Jewish graves.
Too many of us have been touched, personally, by the darkness of the Nazis. The decision by some European governments to outlaw the sign is, itself, a symbol of rejection of the ideology and its implementation.
What would be the point of trying to "rehabilitate" such a symbol?
The fact that there are parts of the world where this cross may be anodyne is not the issue. After all, in many parts of the world, it is deeply insulting to show someone the soles of your feet. Do you think it appropriate that we, for whom it is an irrelevance, have the right to sit with our feet up and pointing outwards as I saw Westerners do in India? No, imo: it is just insulting. In the same way, the use of the hooked cross is still deeply insulting to millions around the world. Let's bury it for a couple more generations.
All the more reason then, why we should attempt to bury the negative connotations....
But it's not the symbol, Simon....It's the intention behind it....It's like addressing the symptom of a sickness but ignoring the origin.....
And many more millions haven't. That's my point. Is it constructive for a generation to colour the view of the next one? Is it not our job to Construct, and not to stand still, harbouring grieviances, and keeping wounds open? I am nearing my 50th birthday,but I know that the viewpoint of the younger generation is marred by their opinion of the previous one. I speak to many people too young to even remember the ftermath of the wars, and they all seem to be of the same opinion. 'Lest we forget' is right. Nurture the Negative, is wrong.
Future generations will not thank us for passing our fears and phobias onto them. By all means educate. But do so constructively.
The swastika has a worldwide meaning - vide its use by jihadists. It is, however, not the only symbol from the second part of the Great Racist War of the 20th century which has been banned in its country of original use: the imperial flag of Japan (the 'rising sun') is also forbidden. And for very good reason: it flew over Nanking during the systematic rape of its citizens.
For once, I disagree with you, Fede: we must never forget what happened in the Polish camps or the Burma railway or the rape of Nanking. Only by holding these horrors in memory will we have any chance of ensuring that we move away from the mindset that produced them. The perpetrators were ordinary, reasonable people, just like you and me, who, little by little, found themselves embroiled in mass murder.
Forgive? Yes.
Forget? No.
I also understand that people try to rehabilitate it but I do not understand why, unless there is some lurking superstition about its original sun-worship meaning. Perhaps, deep within us, there is a remnant of that most ancient of beliefs, otherwise, why not just ignore it like so many other ancient symbols?
In addition, I want to make it quite clear that I understand what you are saying about intention, Fede. I do not, for example, think that you use it as any sort of intended insult to the survivors of the Nazi regime, including the German people, themselves deeply wounded by the events. I do, however, think that you are swimming against the tide and for no reason that I can fathom (two good water metaphors there!)
So, in addition to your questions, I would add the following:
What beneficial purpose would be served by 'rehabilitating' what is only a collection of straight lines at right angles to each other?
(P.S. for Boo and any others who have delved into feminist thinking: does it not strike you that the use of straight lines and right angles is a statement of masculinity and male dominance? The same has been said by feminist architects of the mindset that produced the grid pattern of streets that typifies the 'modern' city.)
I guess it may be part of the Elgin Marbles syndrome....'Please can we have our ball back?' Kinda thing.....
Thank you for appreciating my stance upon the 'Intention' aspect, simon.
(Incidentally, if someone were to approach me here, and request that I abstain from using this avatar, because the view of it is just too upsetting for them (for whatever reason) I would not hesitate to change it instantly.
My 'attachment' to such a symbol, and reasons for its use, do not extend to harming the feelings of others, whatever my personal opinion of their reasons, may be.)
Curiously, the grid pattern you describe with regard to the feminist way of thinking, does not orientally conflict or imply prejudice.
Square, check and tartan formations reflect the Energy of the Earth Element, and in some oriental quarters, Earth is a feminine, or Yin energy....
In Feng Shui and the Astrological sphere, Earth has three 'Houses':
South-West ( Top-right hand corner*) (number 2) Yang, Called Earth - representative of the Hearth, family home and domain of the Alpha Female...
Nort-East (bottom-left hand corner*) (number 8) Yin, called Mountain - representative of Meditation, Cogitation, Contemplation and Education (and Euston Station, as a friend of mine was wont to add - !!)
Qualities, due to their introspective essence, associated with the 'feminine' within us....
and
Central - no specific direction - (number 5) - representative of the everything and nothing - the "multi-tasking" composite of all the other Houses or numbers - and associated with the feminine because a Mother may be many things in one....
( *The compass points are presented upside-down, as a way of denoting South - Cardinal point, and representing Fire/Emperor - as supreme.)
Again, there may be a great deal in what you say, Simon, with regard to the habitual and constant subjugation of the female - in the majority of disciplines, religions and cultures.
Paradoxically though, these same disciplines, religions and cultures attempt manifest a celebration of the feminine, in one way or another.
A topical and recent example would be the furore surrounding the admission of Moslem women into mosques, and the wearing of the Niquab promoted as a religious argument, but the constant protest by Moslem Authorities that Islam trats its women fairly, and deeply respects the Holy Women and Saints in the Qu'ran.
But I am digressing again, and going off-topic.
'Mea Culpa'.....
So: is rectangular architecture a symbol of phallocracy? Rudolph Steiner certainly thought so. The appeal to the directions must take into account that they are perceived in curves and not straight lines: the curve of the horizon and the bowl of the sky. The matriarchal societies of which we know, including Catal Huyuk, appear to have used curves and, even, to have avoided the use of 'streets' as separated walkways. Whether this is significant is unclear.
As you say, patriarchal institutions such as Christian churches or the Islamic Umma are enlightened by the feminine presence. Mary, mother of Jesus, has a special place in both traditions and her rejection by the Reformers does not entirely surprise! The fact is, however, that despite giving Mary titles such as Mother of God or Shower of the Way, Star of the Sea, Queen of Angels, Mother of the Church, etc., she is very clearly not God's own self which continues to be qualified as male.
I have seen many neo-Nazis with swastika tattoos. They were all male. Whilst some women may wear it, they are, I imagine, in a tiny minority. Nazi-ism had little time for the feminine other than as brood mares for its fictional "master race".
But, having thought, I think I agree with Simon. Why try to reclaim this symbol? Some will find the use of it upsetting or offensive. What is acheived? You say it's a "May we have our ball back" kind of thing. Is the swastika "our" ball? It's not anybody's it's just lines on a page. And lines on a page can "mean" whatever we want them to, to you or me. But symbols are a tool for communicaiton, and communication is a two way thing: it involves not just the meaning we ascribe to a symbol, but the connotations it has in the mind of the person(s) we're communicating with. "Rehabilitating" the swastika is seeking to change the connotations it holds in the minds of others ( the majority of the population, at least in the "West"). Why? The swastika doesn't care.
Martin.
Well, being fortunate enough to know you as I do, I don't think you would engage in anything like this just for the shock value of upsetting other people.
I'm sure that you put a lot of thought into this and you have reasons behind it that are more philosophical than malicious.
So, I look at what you do - appreciate you for who you are - and try to see the message that you are making.
I don't know that I feel one way or the other about it - but knowing you, I know you didn't bring up something like this just to upset people.
But a complete stranger? They might have a different take on it.
-bf
This whole controversy over the swastika, for those who advocate "bringing it back in its original meaning," as it were, rather reminds me of those in the South who continue to fly the Confederate flag and sport it on their vehicles.
"This is my flag and I'm attached to it, and to hell with you if you don't like it," is what it says to me.
Fede... Nirvana makes a good point here.
-bf
Palzang
First, I would like to say that I entirely agree with you that a symbol itself has no inherent meaning, and that it is the perception of the individual or individuals which gives that particular symbol its particular meaning to that particular individual or individuals. Nevertheless, taking into account the history of this particular symbol's usage, and weighing that fact against the Noble Eightfold Path, I do not think that it is skillful to use such a symbol if one knowingly realizes the implications of using it such as offending Jewish survivors of the holocaust, or offending ethnic, racial, and religious minorities, et cetera. While I do not personally find it offensive, I also understand that many, many people in this world do.
Even if we are personally unattached to the symbol, realizing that it was used as a religious symbol well before Hitler and his Third Reich, it does not mean that others will be so easily persuaded to drop their painful perceptions and wrong views of what the swastika originally represented simply because we wish to free them from these things. Healing takes time, and it takes the right conditions. I think that educating people about the swastika's history and religious significance is a step in the right direction, but I also think that this needs to be done carefully and with great consideration. If an action harms another person, even just emotionally, and we are aware of this, we should refrain from doing that action.
Jason
Gung ho?
Certainly not.
I was thinking more along the lines of "anal retentive" or "belligerent".
That's all.
-bf
1. No, I don't find the avatar shocking.
2. Not the first time I saw it.
3. I thought, "Oh, Federica changed her avatar."
4. Yes. I cook a lot of Asian food and some Chinese food packages have the swastika image (I think it means that it is a vegetarian food). I thought that perhaps your avatar had something to do with Buddhism and vegetarianism.
5. No, it is not offensive to me.
My only comment about the avatar is that I think the colors of the Buddhist flag would be a better fit:
http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/history/b_flag.htm
P.S. I have a beautiful pre-WWII Japanese woodblock print. It's hard to tell exactly what the people are doing in the picture, but it looks like ladies shopping in some sort of store, or walking around inside of a shrine. Hanging above the ladies are paper lanterns and on one of the lanterns is the left-facing swastika. If someone can tell me how to post the image, I'd be glad to do so!
Now, as an illustrative example, say I learned that the phonetic sound of 'fuk' was a sacred word in another language, I wouldn't go around saying it where that same phonetic sound is considered to be offensive, vulgar or off-limits. Now, I don't think that should limit people from discussing the sacred meaning of the word in that other language. But I do think that blurting it out in the middle of an uninformed group is not necessarily the right thing to do or Right Speech.
"In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, beneficial, but unendearing & disagreeable to others, he has a sense of the proper time for saying them.
Does that make sense?
_/\_
metta
If memory serves me right, the phonetic sound 'fuk' means melon in Thai.
Regards,
Jason
Simon,
I had never considered the masculinity inherent in the straight line before except in phallic symbols. That's something new to me that I'll keep in mind as I go about my days. It will be interesting to see things in a different way. I won't read any scholarly books or feminist treatises on the subject, I'll just mull it over in my own mind and let you know what I think after a little while. It'll be an interesting project.
Personally, I get a little tired of all the straight lines and pointy ends in all sorts of designs from architectural to furniture and so on. Whenever I see a coffee table with pointy ends (especially glass tops) I can't help thinking "That's just about eye height for a two year old" and then I cringe. I like curved, natural lines, rounded edges and smooth surfaces. I'm tired of Frank LLoyd Wright. I can see the appeal in his designs but when I first saw the house perched above the waterfall, (what's it called? Falling Water? or something) I couldn't help thinking now much I would have liked it better had he followed the curving tree line above instead of imposing those strict, straight lines upon the mountainside. I'd have loved it if the house had looked like it had grown naturally from the side of the mountain. But these architects, they love their mathematical straight lines and angles. Now you've really got me thinking, Simon. I'm a design freak and pore over design sites online all the time and now I'll have a brand new way to look at them. I'll tell you what I think in a few months. Oooh! Ooooh! I've already got a couple of ideas....!
I very much appreciate that using such an avatar on a Buddhist forum brings vastly different responses and results, to my openly brandishing it elsewhere; hence you may be pleased to know that I have limited my use to here, and to the 'other' forum...!
Whilst some of you have pointed out to me that using a symbol denotes some form of attachment, would that not also imply that resistance to it, for historical reasons, and for the connotations it carries, is also a form of 'attachment'?
For the most part, I believe most forum members are probably too young to be able to claim any direct connection to events in WWII, so the 'attachment' is by association, rather than experience.
Though I concede Simon's point regarding current use in the UK, of the symbol as a tatoo on the limbs of Nationalist sympathisers........ Ho-hum.....:nonono:
He's right though. It's mainly a masculine practise. I have yet to see footage of rallies, meetings and marches with women in the fray.
I wonder why? What makes it so? (Hint: Point to ponder......?)
My point in using the Avatar it was really to engender disussion and constructive dialogue, and from my point of view, what endorsed the image for me was the slogan beneath it.
I may have been less inclined to have used it, had the phrase not been there.
Incidentally, it's an image of a porcelain tile, being produced as a cup coaster....
My personal feelings do run in line with the majority, though, and although a fair part of me does say, 'I think it should be OK to use it', another part does accept that its 'general public' use is still a sore point, or maybe a tender one....
Valued discussion, thank you all.
Actually, I was thinking of writing you privately to initiate a discussion like this with you.
I understand the idea of reclaiming things that were once used to hurt. Similarly, I struggle with this issue in modern culture with the the conferte flag ( I REALLY have hard time with that as I grew up in South with active KKK in my city and their fundraising in robes door to door in my neighborhood - talk about intimidation tactic to get people to move!). It also comes up with word "nigga" in hip hop, "beaner" by comic Carlos Mencia, etc
While people of color often use those words among their peers, and feel it has a different energy and one of "reclaiming" the power behind it. I do not know of any group doing that with the swasticker.
I personally feel the not enough time has passed for the trauma of that image to be seen in any way other than fear and hatred. Many people estill have living concentration camp family members living.
I do feel the same way with 'nigga" now. I used to use it among some freinds. But not anymore. And 'spic' or 'wetback'. I have laughed and used that within my family or real close Latino friends because we know we are being sacrcastic to describe soemthing...
Complicated... I have preferences but no definitve stance.
As you will have seen now, my intention was to engender constructive dialogue, and never to offend or hurt. I fully take your point about its association with a more sinster usage, and I equally find it admirable that you chose to await a 'different point of view from the initial resentment'....
This confirms largely what I have felt. That we (specifically on this board) are on the one hand, greatly influenced by social conditioning and cultural history, and on the other hand, are open to transformation and change, knowing that perception is sometimes distorted.....
From this, I would say that at times, we can be at odds with ourselves.... such is our dualistic existence, perhaps....?
More food for thought.....
I wonder what the Dalai Lama would say?
Palzang
It is all a matter of perception.
I think I've mentioned this before, but it's like the photo in the newspaper of a black man running, with a uniformed Police officer in pursuit.
people were asked what their impression of the picture was, and without exception, the black guy was labelled the criminal being pursued by the Law.
It turns out the black guy was actually a plain-clothes Police detective, in pursuit of a wanted man (not in camera shot) with the uniformed officer running to join and assist.
If you not all of the information is to hand, people are going to jump to conclusions or make their minds up in advance, based on what they see/believe/already think they know....
Trust the little one to speak when others remain silent....'Emperor's new clothes' syndrome....!
The perpetrators were ordinary, reasonable people, just like you and me, who, little by little, found themselves embroiled in mass murder.
:rolleyesc mmm once again I'd like to take this statement with a substantial pinch of NaCl.
Although all your other posts are good, Simon. I really doubt that statement. Have you read "the rape of Nanking" by Iris Chang? good book, but horrible situations and atrocities were committed by "reasonable people".
a link that may promote some discussion... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_of_nanking
and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_731
I understand you to be incredibly learned, Simon and your opinions balanced, but somehow I find the statement flawed-just me personally. I am Australian, however any reference to what the japanese (refuse to admit BTW) did to POW's and other races does not inspire me-at all.
Perhaps the term Automaton rather than "reasonable person" should be used in this case.
I am from german parentage hoever my mother was 6 and riddled with Polio when Dresden was bombed-so she was not a Nazi niether was any other member of her/our family-However, I feel somewhat ashamed by the use of the Swastika and like I stated b4 a little offended by its use.
Federica, I have had many polish and Hungarian Jewish friends in the past-ait is virtually impossible to tell them to "let go" so to speak. I fully understand this and agree wholeheartedly with Simon, when he says let it rest for a few more generations.
Latina, I wrote a similar response about a year ago to a post about the use of words such as the "n" word-if I am prevented from using the term as a white person-then I believe it should be dropped from "other" races usage as well-again just my opinion. I don't refer to myself as a white honky (or whatever the derogatory word is for a white person) so why should others?:hair:
kind regards everyone.
Xrayman :ausflag:
me too!
By the way... More power to ya!! :woowoo:
I think that it is very important to remember that the individuals who carried out these atrocities were people, just like you and me. They were not demons, neither was their nation some sort of non-human grouping.
I am old enough to have met many who lived in Germany during the rise of Hitler and his crew. I even knew some early Party members. None of them sported horns and a tail.
If we convince ourselves that they were different - and, thus, less human - than us, we are in danger of allowing the same things to happen again. And we have! Only by discovering within ourselves the potential for evil will we be on guard against it.
The Rape of Nanking was carried out by ordinary soldiers, just as were the abuses in Guantanamo. the difference is only one of scale. In the end, as Gita Sereny says, evil is banal, not extraordinary.
Palzang
It is an unfortunate fact of life that otherwise innocent symbols get hijacked by unsavoury or otherwise hostile groups; in Britain, for example, our own flag is often flown with feelings of guilt, thanks to its' adoption by the white supremacist BNP party. It is up to the British public to continue to fly this flag so that the primary connection with this symbol of our nation is not associated with anything evil or derogatory. Similarly, as Buddhists, I think it is our responsibility to re-adopt the swastika and re-habilitate it; reminding the world what the symbol originally stood for, and thus help remove some of the horrible stigma and negative karma now associated with it.
SG
In life, either we move towards people (in fascination, love, or cooperation), away from them in fear, in disgust, or to avoid their clutches, or we move against them in anger or worse.
Now, if a symbol can signal people not to move towards, but either away or against, that symbol need not be resurrected. It’s useless buggage and laggage!
I am opposed to the sort of sloganism that seems to drive so many elections and am against idolizing symbols of any kind. And I do see a parallel between slogans and symbols. It is only what symbols point to that is truly important; beyond them lie the mysteries that they can only suggest.
If there is something in my heritage that deeply offends the sensibilities of others, let me root that out. It’s not worth preserving. Preserving that in my life would be merely bolstering up my ego.
EDIT: There's an apt English word that sums up my whole argument:
It's UNATTRACTIVE.
Point taken, and well said STP.
respect to you.
cheers
X
My paper, today, contains a brief article about a proposal by Germany that 'Holocaust denial' and use of Nazi-era symbols should be made illegal throughout the European Union. This is likely to be opposed by some of the newly-joined, Eastern European (ex-Commintern) states because Communist/Soviet symboils would still be permitted.
There is, also, a report on the new 'logo' for the ICRC to use in the Israel/Palestine are: a Red Crystal.
This is the official news report:
http://www.icrc.org/Web/Eng/siteeng0.nsf/htmlall/emblem-news-081205
And all three emblems:
Originally posted by Federica:
Since I am still seeing the avatar up there, I am guessing that you feel, Federica, that you haven`t been asked to change it. But to my way of seeing things some of the posts on the thread could be taken as an indirect request (a suggestion, perhaps?) that it be changed. So why do we still see the avatar? I think maybe some feelings were harmed.
But I am not offended by the symbol. I`ve gotten used to seeing it as a Buddhist sign. It is used on maps to indicate the location of all Buddhist temples of whatever sect here in Japan; Federica mentioned something about that.
I found myself feeling somewhat emotional about some of the postings on this thread. As far as I can see, the Rising Sun flag is not outlawed in Japan, and I see it used here. I think it is the Ensign for the Maritime Self-Defense Force, but I`m not sure about that.
I really agreed with Simon`s points about atrocities being commited by human beings, not demons, and how if we forget that it`s a way for it to happen again. So why is it that History gets written by the winners? Why is it that we don`t often get reminded enough of the atrocities commited by the British, Autralians and Americans in WWII?
I really wish I hadn`t missed the film "The Fog of War" about William MacNamara. In a review of it I read that an American general planning the firebombing of civilian cities in Japan said to MacNamara something about the US having to win the war otherwise they`d be charged as war criminals when it was over. Of course they won and the allied generals and war planners got away with it.
We must not forget the past or we will repeat it, as people often say.
I am an American living in Japan. I have visited Nagasaki. I lived in Hiroshima prefecture for a year. Very moving places to visit. I`ve also visited a wonderful peace musem here at a place where many young men were trained as Kamikaze. It is quite an experience to read their good-bye letters to their mothers and brothers and so on.
Some of what Simon wrote reminded me of a great essay by Thomas Merton in a wonerful little book called Raids on the Unspeakable. In the essay Merton writes about how Eichmann at his war crimes trial described what the Nazis had done with seeming rationality and without any repentance. Merton also talked about the British early on making pledges not to target civilians and how later on they did firebombing, then he goes on to talk about the fact that future nuclear holocaust is being planned not by people in mental institutions but by the so-called sane people like our rational generals, politicians and scientists.
What great cartoonist said something like "I have met the enemy, and he is us."?
Anyway, lots of raw feelings about stuff. Maybe the swaztika ought not be used here.
As to how the abominable swastika affects me, that's entirely different. I despise it and loathe its use. It just makes me angry and disdainful of anyone who would brandish it. To me it's just too evocative of a great horror and evil and provocative, also, in that it is quite able to reopen wounds.
I cannot stand the sight of anything having to do with "the most powerful man of the twentieth century." Let me turn that channel off when it rears its ugly head on the TV!
I imagine that there are others here who lost family or friends in the war against the Nazis. Some of us have no living family members left in Germany as a result of ethnic laws and the 'Final Solution'. I carry with me the memory of my father after his return from the parliamentary tour of the newly-liberated camps. It took him years to recover, if he ever did.
All this was carried out under the banner of the Nazi Swastika.
At the same time, I am aware that the banning or legal removal of 'offensive' symbols is an integral part of the totalitarian regimes. No image is more distressing than the pictures of people burning books (Salman Rushdie's Satanic Verses for example - a NOVEL, for goodness' sake!) or steam-rollering albums and CDs in allegedly anti-totalitarian places like the UK or the US. And these acts of censorship taking place precisely where freedom of expression is overtly cherished.
By using a swastika-type logo, Fede challenged each of us to examine our own 'offendedness' and test it against our standards of what is good and skillful. Of course, there is a long tradition of deliberate and provocative 'avatars' and soubriquets, stretching back long before internet bulletin boards. As a process of choosing a name or an image to lead the minds of the audience, it is used all the time. Adolf must have been a popular name in parts of Germany/Austria for some years!
What convinces me that the Swastika still holds enormous power to move people is the very fact that we discuss it at such length and such depth; the extent to which the personal is also shared. This is not a 'scientific' discussion on the proportions of the cross (quite different in Fede's 'skinny' swastika) or its orientation or colour. It takes us into the darkest parts of ourselves: the 'follower' in each of us, the temptation to repression, the concentration camp guard or 'dispassionate doctor' who lurks in the labyrinth of our own minds.
I would not ban or outlaw or suppress any symbol or, even, transformation/modification/satirising of any symbol. Both our deep reverence for or repulsion experienced are 'poisons', 'glamours'. They are the glue with which we stick 'found' elements in memory together and construct an 'opinion' or, even worse, a 'belief'.
Of course, we have some awareness of how we organise the world but, when we are strongly moved by a gestalt of lines and colours, it does suggest that we still have some pretty solid 'work' to do on ourselves.
I found myself feeling somewhat emotional about some of the postings on this thread. As far as I can see, the Rising Sun flag is not outlawed in Japan, and I see it used here. I think it is the Ensign for the Maritime Self-Defense Force, but I`m not sure about that.
I really agreed with Simon`s points about atrocities being commited by human beings, not demons, and how if we forget that it`s a way for it to happen again. So why is it that History gets written by the winners? Why is it that we don`t often get reminded enough of the atrocities commited by the British, Autralians and Americans in WWII?
Void or maybe Simon,
Could you please provide me with a link to some documentation about atrocities committed by Australians in WWII-I'd be fascinated to see that-especially those committed by those on the thai-burma railroad, those on the kokoda track, those rotten POW's etc. etc.
skeptic :skeptical
Palzang
cheers,
Xrayman.
Very interesting, Pally.
I find it amazing that a country could so quickly realize (whether true or false) the amount of negative karma they had created.
And accepted it.
-bf