• xXthrowawayXx [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Stop trying to rehabilitate the wolfsangel. If your town had it for three centuries then maybe that’s not nazi symbolism. If you join a nationalist right wing regiment and get it tattooed on yourself, that’s Nazi symbolism.

    Think about it like the swastika. If someone is choosing it now, in Europe, in a right wing military organization, they’re nazis, not fans of Indian symbols and culture. Do you know how I can tell?

    • barsoap@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Think about it like the swastika.

      No. Then we can also throw away pretty much all of Germanic culture as the Nazis appropriated all of it. It would mean we’d let them win after the fact.

      It’s more like the number 88: Sure, might be a Nazi, might also be a guy born in 88. People not knowledgeable about Nazi symbolism don’t actually recognise it as Nazi symbolism which is a gigantic difference to the Swastika. But that’s about the Wolfsangel in general.

      Regarding Azov, should the logo have been changed? On balance, I say it would’ve been a good idea, especially since it’s 1:1 the Svoboda Wolfsangel.

      • xXthrowawayXx [none/use name]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        oh no, not germanic cultutre appropriated by the nazis and wideley seen as dogwhistles! how will the world move on?

        your’e absolutely right that the wolfsangel is like the number 88. maybe someone with it in a username or email was born or married that year. but when they’re joining a nationalist right wing militia the number 88 means they’re a nazi

        we’re not talking about random people on the street with tee shirts that have wolfsangels on em (btw they’d be nazis too). we’re talking about people joining a famously right wing, nationalist militia in a country with a long history of nazism. they didn’t pick those symbols out because they just love interesting history!

        when people choose symbols associated with nazis now they’re nazis. i’m sorry, that’s just reality.

        • barsoap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          No, we’re not talking about that. You are. All I said about the Wolfsangel is that it’s not an unambigiously nazi symbol, which you just agreed to, the rest is you foaming at the mouth.

          Yes, Azov at the beginning was a Nazi org, otherwise it would hardly had to have get denazified when getting rolled into official state structures, now would it. What’s your fucking problem.

          • xXthrowawayXx [none/use name]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            My problem is that we’re not talking about this in a vacuum. We aren’t having a nice little hypothetical conversation about weather or not you can judge the town of burgweldel for having a wolfsangel on their town coat of arms.

            We are talking about people joining a right wing nationalist militia using the wolfsangel. In the context of this conversation it is unambiguously a Nazi dogwhistle and indefensible, unless you want to defend Nazis. Do you want to defend Nazis?

            • barsoap@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              We are talking about people joining a right wing nationalist militia using the wolfsangel. In the context of this conversation it is unambiguously a Nazi dogwhistle and indefensible, unless you want to defend Nazis.

              Again: Azovs at the beginning was a Nazi org. I never did say anything to the contrary. Yes they absolutely chose it because of its implications.

              On the other side of the equation we have plenty of army insignia all over Europe using the Wolfsangel, both historically (pre-Nazi) and contemporarily – it’s a hunting weapon, after all, you shouldn’t be more surprised to see it on military insignia than a sword or bow and arrow.

              Should Azov have changed their logo? I do think so. But at the same time it’s not valid to say “Because they still use the same symbol they’re still Nazis”.

              • xXthrowawayXx [none/use name]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Those other regiments aren’t on the other side of the equation because there is no equation. We’re not talking about the whole of semiotics throughout the history of europe, we’re talking about a specific nationalist right wing militia that uses Nazi symbols and ideas.

                They chose a symbol to dogwhistle to everyone that they’re Nazis. Now they say they’re not Nazis but they kept the symbol that they chose to low key tell everyone me they’re Nazis.

                Do you know what that means? it means they’re still nazis

                This isn’t hard to understand. Theres no nuance here. They use the nazi markings knowing they’re nazi markings. They’re Nazis.

                • barsoap@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  They chose a symbol to dogwhistle to everyone that they’re Nazis.

                  Yes.

                  Now they say they’re not Nazis but they kept the symbol that they chose to low key tell everyone me they’re Nazis.

                  No. For the simple reason that there’s no sufficient personal or ideological continuation of “they”. Vast swathes of Nazis left in the process of Azov becoming a regular brigade of the National Guard because they didn’t want to be part of a government-controlled organisation out to de-nazify the thing, regular people joined. Also no further foreigners joined, those get sorted into the foreign legion, part of the army. National guard is run by the ministry of interior, not defence ministry.

                  The powers that be in the ministry of interior decided not to replace the logo. I have no insight as to their reasoning.

                  • xXthrowawayXx [none/use name]@hexbear.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Okay, two different theys, the most recent being the ukranian government, whose decision to keep the name and logo you just can’t fathom.

                    Let me give a little insight into their reasoning: they want to keep the Nazi regiment.

                    If you bought a Nazi bar that had to close down because of all the Nazis and you wanted to reopen it as a bar, but without all the Nazis, would you keep the old name and leave the logo the same?

                    No, of course you wouldn’t. You’d change the name, clean house, completely renovate, change the menu, stop serving jagermiester and even take a strong anti fascist line.

                    Since the ukranian government didn’t do that it’s obvious they want to keep running the Nazi bar on the dl.