Since LN wants her swastika back, we decided to have a debate and then vote on it. Should swastikas be useable as avatars? What about other inflamatory symbols? Where do we draw the line?

I'm going to put the poll up now, but it'd be nice if we could refrain from voting until we've heard some of the arguments, just like in a proper, grown-up debate.

i think at issue is whether a swastika could be said to be denigrating a certain group, no?

__________________
The New Topical: current affairs, current events, politics, political, culture, cultural, ethics & economics discussion debate forum.

Yep, that's part of it, but I was trying to be more general than just "should LN get to have her swastika". I'll set up a second poll for that if you like.

Personally, I don't think a picture by itself can denigrate a person/group. It all depends on how you interpret it and what the intentions were - such vague criteria as to make the whole thing pointless.

But I'm guessing that there are lots of people who don't agree, which is why I put that option up.

Originally Posted by Neko

Yep, that's part of it, but I was trying to be more general than just "should LN get to have her swastika". I'll set up a second poll for that if you like.

only if you want, i'm just weighing in with my two pennies as a poster.

__________________
The New Topical: current affairs, current events, politics, political, culture, cultural, ethics & economics discussion debate forum.

Originally Posted by Neko

Personally, I don't think a picture by itself can denigrate a person/group. It all depends on how you interpret it and what the intentions were - such vague criteria as to make the whole thing pointless. But I'm guessing that there are lots of people who don't agree, which is why I put that option up.

i don't know. some of the nazi propaganda was pretty good at denigrating the german jews.

but a swastika is less direct than that, and can mean a lot of other things. including, primarily, the regime. not just shorthand for what the regime endorsed.

if you hold a symbol to account for acts committed under it's name, no national flag would be acceptable either.

__________________
The New Topical: current affairs, current events, politics, political, culture, cultural, ethics & economics discussion debate forum.

Well, my point against it was two-folded.

First, it's an in-joke between LN and the old P&CA crowd. It does not have the same history here on TNT and thus could be misinterpreted by new comers.

Second, you guys were mortally offended by what you perceived as sexism/sexist remarks/insulting words towards women. Fair enough. But is sexism worst than anti-semitism?

The nazi flag is a symbol of an ideology that most decent people would associate with Evil, with a major E. To use it for fun and provocation is bad taste.

Bad taste, in itself, isn't a crime but in the same ways that insults towards women do not promote good debates or make women feel welcome in a given place, an insult to Jewish people (and,really, to any decent human beings) isn't going to be promoting good debate either...

So, personally, unless LN put a serious twist to the Nazi flag and get a title like "provocateur en chef" or "i can't leave teenagehood behind" or "growing up sucks" or "i still sleep with my teddy bear", then, i am rather against it.

At least Contra's burning flag was making a political point and summarising in one image his views of US foreign policies. LN's nazi flag wouldn't even do that... In some weird way, i might be more willing to grant it if she was a true neo-nazi or anti-semit like we have had some. In that case, it would at least advertise to the world what they are.

Originally Posted by psyche

[it] can mean a lot of other things. including, primarily, the regime. not just shorthand for what the regime endorsed.

? I don't think endorsing the Nazi regime is any different from endorsing their policies.

"I am a Nazi but I disagree with what Hitler did" (unless to say you think he didn't go far enough) would be a weird and theoretical matter. In practice, people waving Nazi flags are neo-nazis seeking to re-enact Hitler's policies. Or some barely milder variations of it.

Quote:

if you hold a symbol to account for acts committed under it's name, no national flag would be acceptable either.

Not all bads are equivalent. The British, the French and the Americans have had their fair share of bad behaviour but nothing that compares with the Nazis. That's objectively measurable. And they never have had a policy of sheer extermination of a given group. Even the US actions vs. the Native Americans are not comparable in the sense that they lacked coherence and theoretic cohesion.

But you can't just presume that a particular image has one set meaning, even if it seems obvious.

Someone could use an old antisemitic Nazi poster as an avatar (wouldn't read very well, but there you go) and without asking them you wouldn't know whether they agreed or disagreed with the sentiments. They might very well be using to promote awareness of modern antisemitism, and even if they aren't, it might have that effect on most of the people who see it.

Arguably LN's showing up people's hypocrisy and questioning the faith we place in symbols. Entirely laudable as far as I'm concerned.

If I used this as my avatar, would it be acceptable or not:

Originally Posted by Gilles de Rais

Second, you guys were mortally offended by what you perceived as sexism/sexist remarks/insulting words towards women. Fair enough. But is sexism worst than anti-semitism?

Are you accusing LN of antisemitism?

Thing is, the meaning of those sexist remarks was clearly understandable and plainly directed at us - so even if you didn't think it fitted into the bigotry category (which I was always pretty uncomfortable with TBH), it was still covered by the rules against personal insults and trolling.

LN has made her reasons for wanting a swastika pretty clear, and none of them are insulting (though they could be classified as trolling, I suppose).