Ps. My thoughts are a little disorganised, so if there’s anything problematic or inaccurate, just let me know.

Let’s begin by talking about the hooked cross. Most of the culture around the world see it in a positive light. In India, they call it swastika, in China wan or wanzi, in Japan manji, in Korea manja, and so on. There are also various native American groups as well as Europeans (Ukraine, Finland) who revere this symbol. And from little that I know, I also heard about it being part of Jewish synagogues in some places.

Despite these groups being cooperative and making heavy changes to the symbols, by rejecting the angled cross, and adding dots and curves, the hate against PoC for following their beliefs did not stop. Could you deny the bigots a symbol for their evil ideology, by letting PoC reclaim the symbol? Yes. But would they choose to? No. For about 3000 years, it was a revered symbol in most parts of the world. For almost a quarter of a century, it was a hate symbol in a small part of the world. And yet, here we are.

Putting aside the symbol, let’s talk about the word itself. For most of the Indians out there, having the word “swastika” appropriated by Nazi is horrible - it robbed the original meaning of the word स्वस्तिक. People out there name their kids Swastik (masculine) and Swastika (feminine). I can’t just imagine how they’ll be bullied. Swastika is also related to various figures in the Hindu mythology. There’s also a yoga pose called the Swastik asana. There’s also Buddhist references out there that I’m unaware of.

If there’s so much concern about this hooked cross being a hate symbol, why isn’t it being calling it flyfot or hakenkreuz? Surely, those are Euro-centric words, right? Why drag a culture that had nothing to do with the Holocaust?

Enough about the swastika. Let’s talk about an imperialist symbol that is still respected. The symbol of terror, bloodshed, capitalism and colonialism. The Union Jack.

The first Union Jack was made in the early 1600s, when England and Scotland unified. In the 1800s, they colonized Ireland, and thus formed the modern Union Jack that you all know today.

Under this symbol and every version of it that has existed, 165 million Indians were killed in just forty year’s time - colonialism lasted for almost 200 years, starting from 1757 to 1947, and also add the other victims of colonialism of the British Empire, from America, Africa, Australia and Asia, as well as Europe. We are talking about atrocities like artificial famines, starvation, pogroms, slave-trade, and apartheid, just to name a few. National and religious artifacts were desecrated and stolen. Territories were robbed of their wealth. Natural resources destroyed. Artisans and craftsmen, torch bearers of culture were killed, or handicapped. Let’s also not forget the aftermath of disastrous independence of colonies. Like for example, the Partition of undivided India.

And yet, this hate symbol exists out there. People wave this flag in pride. The vilification of swastika was never about the Nazis. It is a convenient excuse to deflect how the Allied forces and anyone associated with it are the good guys at the expense of making vulnerable groups feeling uncomfortable. Invasion of Vietnam? War crime sponsored in Gaza? Genocide in Bangladesh? “We defeated the Nazis, we can’t be that evil”.

  • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Ukrainians and Fins revering the Swastika in the modern day isn’t exactly an example of its good usage. iirc fascists in Finland were using the Swastika before the Nazis did, and the Nazis partly drew inspiration from the Fin usage.

    I think the reason the Swastika gets the treatment it does is that it’s necessary to the mythology of liberalism that the advent of Nazism was basically a demonic invasion from another plane of existence or some atavistic awakening of an evil in the heart of the human species. It – and fascism generally – can’t be recognized for what they are, the inevitable consequence of capitalism interacting with Euro imperialist culture, so they need to either be something totally Other or something that exists at the core of humanity. Hitler needs to be a special, powerful demagogue who basically cast a spell on the people of Germany, because if that’s not what happened then we might need to grapple with how the liberal Wiemar Republic produced the Nazis. The Swastika is an extension of this, just as Hitler is Satan and the Nazis are demons, the Swastika is the Mark of the Beast, a magical symbol used in evil rituals to corrupt people, and therefore totalizingly reviled. What other explanation could there be for the way Germany bans this iconography while allowing fascists to run wild? It’s not a measure that is preventing another Holocaust, it’s a measure that creates a basis for the next one, so long as it looks a little different.

    I don’t feel as strongly as you do about the cultural reception of the Swastika, honestly I just wanted to talk about Hitler not being a wizard because it bothers me. Really, ever since I saw an offhand comment here about Trump keeping a book of Hitler’s speeches it’s been on my mind, because the myth also produces exactly that kind of fetishization of Hitler’s words, which is, uh, not great.