Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Regarding Namp's comments on political symbols:

In recent history, the Swastika was used as a prominent symbol only once - by the genocidal nazi regime. It became a symbol of absolute evil because no one else other than the nazis used it. Not in the 20th century, anyway.

Also, the original owners of the Swastika haven't made any efforts to take their symbol back and change its meaning in the public eye.

The Hammer & Sickle, on the other hand, has been used by numerous different groups of people for the entire duration of the 20th century. It has been used by good communists as well as by evil stalinists. It has been used by people fighting for justice and freedom as well as by people enforcing brutal oppression. There were even several situations in which the soldiers on opposing sides in a battle used the Hammer & Sickle as their banner.

This diversity of uses is what makes the Hammer & Sickle a mostly neutral symbol today. It is not the symbol of any specific regime.

Personally, when I see the Hammer & Sickle, I think of its original meaning: a symbol of the unity between workers and peasants, a symbol of hope and liberation.

Eh...not so.  I've seen more than one instance of its modern use.  A Karate dojo that uses the community gymnasium after my old basketball team used to practice and they have the swastika emblem on the back of the collar of their robes.  One of my teammates thought it was a Nazi symbol and made a comment about it, and one of the instructors overheard so he gave us the low-down.  The traditional swastika with clockwise angles, all of which are vertical and horizontal, hasn't changed in centuries.  He explained that it mostly exists today in Asia as a symbol of peace and prosperity, which made sense to me because a Korean guy I know wears one around his neck.

The Nazis, very fittingly reversed the directions the lines were pointed, and tilted the symbol 45

Posted

I think you're right Anathema, Napoleon was a hero. Furthermore he was a genius. In a military side (don't forget he conquered Europe) but in a politic side too.

In a domestic side he modernized french society. He defined new rules and law with the "Code Civil" which still exists. He created the "Banque de France", he reorganized thefrench administration, he created the commerce houses whici organize the local economic life, etc etc.

Posted

To some people he is. It all depends on your perspective. Personally I see Napoleon as a great historical figure who did a lot of good and a lot of bad for the world (in approximately equal ammounts). I see Mussolini as a man who simply fell in with bad company. Others may disagree. It doesn't make either point of view correct.

Posted

I see Napoleon as the man who brought order into France and other countries (such as the Netherlands), and in those where he succeeded he brought about a lot of good things. In other countries however, like Spain, he was determined to impose his order on those countries and caused many deaths.

Mussolini however, was pure scum. Many things that were realised during his reign cannot be considered his doing, like the Italian code. The preparations for it had started long before he took power, and though they did an excellent job, Mussolin made it so that many facist and racist elements were put in- wich were removed, and the code as it should be is still in use today.

Posted

Napoleon had a great military mind, his smashing vicotiroes of austerlitts and where he was outnumber 3 to one by Russian, Austrian and Prussians? I dont remember Austlerits well, just waterloo... He even managed to come back to power after being exiled to lead the short lived second empire, had he wont the batte of Waterloo, Smashed the british and Prussian forces, Europe would be different today...

Posted

I think Napoleon was a hero , Ive read a lot of books about him , and josaphine , ive even been to the island where he was exiled the first time (Elba) if you want a good read , read a book called "Napoleons island" , which describes his life on st helena in great detail , I cant remember who the author is though. One thing which always puzzeled me though was why did they cut off his manhood when he died , I believe its in a museum in France somewhere.

Shy  ::)

  • 2 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.