So just to meet my weekly quota of sensationalist stories, I present this gem from my state:
A candidate for state representative says the swastika he's wearing in a snapshot was part of his Halloween costume.
However, the replica of a Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross awarded to German Nazi heroes on the wall behind him is there because he likes what it stands for, said Republican candidate Rodney Hiebert, 42, of Taloga.
“Traditionally it represents honor and dignity, which frankly is something this country can use more of,” Hiebert said. He is running for House District 59, which includes Kingfisher, Blaine, Canadian, Dewey, Major and Woodward counties.
He said he's not circulating a campaign photograph to counter the one of him wearing a swastika.
Hiebert faces incumbent Rep. Mike Sanders, 36, R-Kingfisher. The race will be decided Tuesday since no Democrats are running.
Sanders said Hiebert wore the swastika the day he filed as a candidate at the state Capitol, although was hesitant say anything critical about his opponent's choice to wear it.
“We live in America, and everyone has the right to put their name on the ballot,” Sanders said.
Hiebert said he is not a racist. He said people of American Indian descent help in his campaign, and he believes more history about indigenous Oklahomans should be taught in schools. He also believes Spanish language classes should be eliminated, and there is no need to incorporate more black history into teachers' lesson plans, he said.
“Mexico is a Third World country and Spain is economically folding,” Hiebert said. “I don't see any reason why our young people need to waste their time learning Spanish.”
Sanders is seeking his third term as state representative. He is employed at his family's business, Sanders Funeral Home in Kingfisher. He earned a bachelor's degree in history and political science from Oklahoma Christian University.
He began working on political campaigns at a young age, including the 2000 campaign for President George W. Bush. Under the Bush administration, he served as director of interns at the White House.
He later served as deputy chief of staff for rural development for the U.S. Department of Agriculture. From 1999 to 2003, he served on the Council for Small Business for Gov. Frank Keating.
Hiebert said he blames incumbents for the problems in state government, and will serve only one term if elected. He's not accepting campaign donations, because he doesn't want to be beholden to any special interest groups, he said.
In the past, Hiebert has worked as roughneck in the oil field, as a nursing home aide, and has farmed. He said he's not currently employed because he's focusing on the race.
If elected, he said he plans to research the state lottery's contribution to education, concentrate on legislation that reduces crime and support measures that would benefit oil producers and reduce government spending.
Seriously, if you like the Iron Cross so much then maybe at least you could wear a World War 1 version without the swastika. Although I am sure he could find a military award that stand for 'honor & dignity' that doesn't come from a country & time period like Nazi Germany. But what do I know...
I may as well say it before anybody else does, but the Iron Cross, like a lot of things, was corrupted by the Nazis.
I may be wrong, and no doubt somebody will correct me, but I'm sure the Iron Cross goes back to Teutonic Knights and the Baltic crusades. It being a sort of 'muscular christianity.
Also, the death's head symbol the SS used was Fredrick the great's honour guard? Or Medal for bravery??
Anyway, D-USA is right, if he wanted to use a symbol of honour, why not the Victoria Cross. I was going to mention MOH, but isn't it a federal offence for a non-winner of the MOH to wear it unless you're a relative of the winner??
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:I may as well say it before anybody else does, but the Iron Cross, like a lot of things, was corrupted by the Nazis
Very true. That's why I was thinking that a pre-WWII Iron Cross would have been better. Instead he is wearing an Iron Cross with a Swastika inside of it.
And this is me just being judgmental but looking like a skin-head in his picture probably doesn't help him much.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:Also, the death's head symbol the SS used was Fredrick the great's honour guard? Or Medal for bravery??
The Totenkopf actually became a very popular military symbol in the 19th century (I can't remember if it actually originated with the Germans or not in usage), but especially among vanguard units and elites. It's actually still very widely used despite the negative connotations since WWII.
I used to have a wallet ith the iron cross. Its more or less a "Tough Guy" Biker kinda symbol now. The problem is that particular one he is wearing has the swastika on it.
d-usa wrote:
“Mexico is a Third World country and Spain is economically folding,” Hiebert said. “I don't see any reason why our young people need to waste their time learning Spanish.”
I'm so proud of my state. We seem to somehow produce the worst wackjobs that humanity has to offer while at the same time actually having some decent folk live here. It's an odd paradox.
agnosto wrote:I'm so proud of my state. We seem to somehow produce the worst wackjobs that humanity has to offer while at the same time actually having some decent folk live here. It's an odd paradox.
Absolutely mindblowing actually. I'm proud of my state too, just not some of the gak that's produced.
hotsauceman1 wrote:Same here, Cali is full of hippy morons but have some of the kindest people ever.
You don't call it "Cali" if you're from California. That's what east coasters who think they're cool because they're wearing Hollister clothing call California.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:I may as well say it before anybody else does, but the Iron Cross, like a lot of things, was corrupted by the Nazis.
I may be wrong, and no doubt somebody will correct me, but I'm sure the Iron Cross goes back to Teutonic Knights and the Baltic crusades. It being a sort of 'muscular christianity.
Also, the death's head symbol the SS used was Fredrick the great's honour guard? Or Medal for bravery??
Anyway, D-USA is right, if he wanted to use a symbol of honour, why not the Victoria Cross. I was going to mention MOH, but isn't it a federal offence for a non-winner of the MOH to wear it unless you're a relative of the winner??
Under the same logic, you can argue that people should be allowed to use the swastika. I'm not trying to argue, but just showing the point. People don't get to set their own meanings for symbols. You can't fly a Nazi flag as a symbol of anti smoking laws and expect it to be accepted.
The Iron Cross is different though; it it does get misinterpreted, it will probably be interpreted as a biker symbol.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:I may as well say it before anybody else does, but the Iron Cross, like a lot of things, was corrupted by the Nazis
Very true. That's why I was thinking that a pre-WWII Iron Cross would have been better. Instead he is wearing an Iron Cross with a Swastika inside of it.
And this is me just being judgmental but looking like a skin-head in his picture probably doesn't help him much.
I was about to say the same thing. I was going to order reproduction iron crosses for Warhammer costumes, but the only ones I could find were the WWII variant.
So this is the guy who keeps posting here about his Nazi-themed IG army!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:I was going to order reproduction iron crosses for Warhammer costumes, but the only ones I could find were the WWII variant.
Manchu wrote:So this is the guy who keeps posting here about his Nazi-themed IG army!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:I was going to order reproduction iron crosses for Warhammer costumes, but the only ones I could find were the WWII variant.
http://www.milprom.com/German/medals/index.htm
Less than halfway down the page.
Probably not, he wanted ones without swastikas.
Which also makes sense for cosplay Empire.
Easiest answer for him would be to make his own. Do your own pattern of a teutonic cross and thus avoid all issues.
I guess it just needs more time like the emblem Nero used. They used that as well if I remember correctly. But, I guess that may just stray more off topic.
Orlanth wrote:
Easiest answer for him would be to make his own. Do your own pattern of a teutonic cross and thus avoid all issues.
Yeah, no one would ever recognize anything similar to a Teutonic Cross.
But only the ignorami would recognise it as an exclusively 'Nazi' symbol.
Does that include you?
I sincerely hope not.
The Teutonic Cross is very 'Germanic', so is the Warhammer Empire.
Otherwise we might as well include caveats like 'no Jews were harmed in the production of this steam tank.'
Ignorance need not rule, even in popular cutlure.
Orlanth wrote:
Easiest answer for him would be to make his own. Do your own pattern of a teutonic cross and thus avoid all issues.
Yeah, no one would ever recognize anything similar to a Teutonic Cross.
But only the ignorami would recognise it as an exclusively 'Nazi' symbol.
Does that include you?
I sincerely hope not.
Orlanth wrote:
Easiest answer for him would be to make his own. Do your own pattern of a teutonic cross and thus avoid all issues.
If the Teutonic Cross is an issue, then anyone that would recognize it would take issue with its depiction; because the recognition of it is based on its depiction.
Orlanth wrote:
Ignorance need not rule, even in popular cutlure.
Orlanth wrote:
Easiest answer for him would be to make his own. Do your own pattern of a teutonic cross and thus avoid all issues.
If the Teutonic Cross is an issue, then anyone that would recognize it would take issue with its depiction; because the recognition of it is based on its depiction.
The Teutonic Cross of itself isn't an issue. Wearing one with the swastika in the middle is, as is wearing one with a black or field grey uniform.
WW1 Germans can possibly be misidentified by Nazis, however Empire cosplay is another matter.
dogma wrote:
Orlanth wrote:
Ignorance need not rule, even in popular cutlure.
It doesn't need to, but it does anyway.
And normally such reactions can be defused with just a little foresight.
Hence searching for an Iron Cross without a swastika.
Generally speaking, unless you're seriously into ancient far-eastern mysticism, and even then you'll have some explaining to do, anything with a swastika on it is going to cause you no end of grief.
Monster Rain wrote:Generally speaking, unless you're seriously into ancient far-eastern mysticism, and even then you'll have some explaining to do, anything with a swastika on it is going to cause you no end of grief.
In Oklahoma you may get away with it if you are native-American, since they also used it historically.
Heck, the 45th Infantry Division even used it as their unit insignia prior to WW2 due to the native-American influence in the region:
But even the US military knew better than to go the "Sure, Hitler perverted it, but the swastika has a long and glorious tradition" route. Sometimes, once something is tainted, it is just ruined forever. I think pencil mustaches should make a comeback, but Hitler ruined that as well.
Monster Rain wrote:Generally speaking, unless you're seriously into ancient far-eastern mysticism, and even then you'll have some explaining to do, anything with a swastika on it is going to cause you no end of grief.
In Oklahoma you may get away with it if you are native-American, since they also used it historically.
d-usa wrote:
But even the US military knew better than to go the "Sure, Hitler perverted it, but the swastika has a long and glorious tradition" route. Sometimes, once something is tainted, it is just ruined forever. I think pencil mustaches should make a comeback, but Hitler ruined that as well.
Not entirely tainted. Tainted in the western mindset only.
Buddhist swastikas often adorn tombstones, monuments and of course buddha statues.
d-usa wrote:
But even the US military knew better than to go the "Sure, Hitler perverted it, but the swastika has a long and glorious tradition" route. Sometimes, once something is tainted, it is just ruined forever. I think pencil mustaches should make a comeback, but Hitler ruined that as well.
Not entirely tainted. Tainted in the western mindset only.
d-usa wrote:The German military still uses a version of the Teutonic cross, and they are hardly pro-nazi.
Don't they still call it an eisernes Kreuz? Or do they only call it a Bundeswehr Kreuz? I remember reading an article where some Germans were pushing to bring the Iron Cross medal back, since there was no equivalent medal for bravery at the time, but instead they introduced the Bundeswehr Cross of Honor for Valor.
These days, the iron crosses in Germany use an oak leaf cluster instead of the swastika.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
I know what eisernes Kreuz means, and what you posted isn't one. That's the Bundeswehr Cross of Honor for Valor, AKA das Ehrenkreuz der Bundeswehr für Tapferkeit.
I'm asking if the Germans still refer to the Bundeswehr insignia as an eisernes Kreuz, or just a Bundeswehr Kreuz (or something else).
Edit - You edited your post as I was making mine, I see you labeled the new medal. As far as I know, there aren't any new Iron Crosses post-WWII. All of them dating from WWII have a swastika on them, and after WWII they stopped being awarded.
These days, the iron crosses in Germany use an oak leaf cluster instead of the swastika.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
They did enough to "change it up" from the previous incarnation though.
I think all Iron Cross winners from WW2 were issued replacement Iron Crosses with the oak leaf clusters.
The new one is still an "iron cross" in shape, but the insert and the change from silver/iron to gold made it different enough as well and helps move it past the taint of the WW2 version.
Melissia wrote:As I said, that's the replacement Honor Cross.
True, I was just commenting in the spirit of "even the Germans knew that they cannot simply reissue the WW1 version because the WW2 version ruined it" so they changed it up a pit.
Heck, if the guy wore that Iron Cross instead of the WW2 version he would get less flack for it. Although as a German citizen I would probably punch him for wearing a military award that he didn't earn.
I wonder if he ever bothered to join the military to actually earn an award.
I think all Iron Cross winners from WW2 were issued replacement Iron Crosses with the oak leaf clusters.
Are you sure about that? The Knight's Cross with Oak Leaves was a separate (higher) award, and I've seen tons of photos of medals with swastikas, but I've never seen one with oak leaves in place of the swastika. I just figured after the war they weren't allowed to wear the medals anymore.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
d-usa wrote:Heck, if the guy wore that Iron Cross instead of the WW2 version he would get less flack for it. Although as a German citizen I would probably punch him for wearing a military award that he didn't earn.
Yeah, besides the fact that the dude is an idiot for wearing a WWII-era Iron Cross with a swastika, even if he had a WWI version I would have thought it was pretty disrespectful that he was wearing a medal he didn't earn.
Hordini wrote:Don't they still call it an eisernes Kreuz? Or do they only call it a Bundeswehr Kreuz? I remember reading an article where some Germans were pushing to bring the Iron Cross medal back, since there was no equivalent medal for bravery at the time, but instead they introduced the Bundeswehr Cross of Honor for Valor.
Yes, we still call it iron cross / eisernes Kreuz. The name hasn't changed, only the look.
Hordini wrote:Are you sure about that? The Knight's Cross with Oak Leaves was a separate (higher) award, and I've seen tons of photos of medals with swastikas, but I've never seen one with oak leaves in place of the swastika. I just figured after the war they weren't allowed to wear the medals anymore.
In 1957 germany made a law which allowed veterans to wear their earned medals in public (especially iron cross & knights cross) if they got a version without the Hakenkreuz or other symbols directly associated with the third reich (like the double sig runes of the SS). Iron / knights crosses got oak leaves instead of the Hakenkreuz, so d-usa got it right.
Hordini wrote:Don't they still call it an eisernes Kreuz? Or do they only call it a Bundeswehr Kreuz? I remember reading an article where some Germans were pushing to bring the Iron Cross medal back, since there was no equivalent medal for bravery at the time, but instead they introduced the Bundeswehr Cross of Honor for Valor.
Yes, we still call it iron cross / eisernes Kreuz. The name hasn't changed, only the look.
Hordini wrote:Are you sure about that? The Knight's Cross with Oak Leaves was a separate (higher) award, and I've seen tons of photos of medals with swastikas, but I've never seen one with oak leaves in place of the swastika. I just figured after the war they weren't allowed to wear the medals anymore.
In 1957 germany made a law which allowed veterans to wear their earned medals in public (especially iron cross & knights cross) if they got a version without the Hakenkreuz or other symbols directly associated with the third reich (like the double sig runes of the SS). Iron / knights crosses got oak leaves instead of the Hakenkreuz, so d-usa got it right.
Cool, thanks for the clarification, Weltenwolf. I figured they still called it an eisernes Kreuz in the Bundeswehr, I just wasn't sure (the military is a topic I usually don't bring up with Germans). I guess the oak leaves replacing the swastika is something different than the actual Knight's Cross with Oak Leaves award. That's nice that they allowed them to do that, seems like a good compromise.
LoneLictor wrote:Just to make sure, there's no one here who thinks he's not racist, right?
I don't know for sure if he's racist, although I'm certainly not ruling it out. Judging from the article and the video though, at the very least he definitely seems like an idiot. It's quite possible that he's being serious and does only admire the positive aspects of the iron cross (courage, honor, valor, etc. etc.), and is just too dumb to realize that that doesn't undo the horrible, racist associations that the Nazis gave the medal, and doesn't realize that the vast majority of people will associate the medal, particularly the WWII-era version with a swastika, with the Nazis first and foremost.
Not that it really makes that much difference at this point whether he actually is racist or not, since I don't think there's any way he's going to actually win the election.
d-usa wrote:So just to meet my weekly quota of sensationalist stories, I present this gem from my state:
A candidate for state representative says the swastika he's wearing in a snapshot was part of his Halloween costume.
However, the replica of a Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross awarded to German Nazi heroes on the wall behind him is there because he likes what it stands for, said Republican candidate Rodney Hiebert, 42, of Taloga.
“Traditionally it represents honor and dignity, which frankly is something this country can use more of,” Hiebert said. He is running for House District 59, which includes Kingfisher, Blaine, Canadian, Dewey, Major and Woodward counties.
He said he's not circulating a campaign photograph to counter the one of him wearing a swastika.
Hiebert faces incumbent Rep. Mike Sanders, 36, R-Kingfisher. The race will be decided Tuesday since no Democrats are running.
Sanders said Hiebert wore the swastika the day he filed as a candidate at the state Capitol, although was hesitant say anything critical about his opponent's choice to wear it.
“We live in America, and everyone has the right to put their name on the ballot,” Sanders said.
Hiebert said he is not a racist. He said people of American Indian descent help in his campaign, and he believes more history about indigenous Oklahomans should be taught in schools. He also believes Spanish language classes should be eliminated, and there is no need to incorporate more black history into teachers' lesson plans, he said.
“Mexico is a Third World country and Spain is economically folding,” Hiebert said. “I don't see any reason why our young people need to waste their time learning Spanish.”
Sanders is seeking his third term as state representative. He is employed at his family's business, Sanders Funeral Home in Kingfisher. He earned a bachelor's degree in history and political science from Oklahoma Christian University.
He began working on political campaigns at a young age, including the 2000 campaign for President George W. Bush. Under the Bush administration, he served as director of interns at the White House.
He later served as deputy chief of staff for rural development for the U.S. Department of Agriculture. From 1999 to 2003, he served on the Council for Small Business for Gov. Frank Keating.
Hiebert said he blames incumbents for the problems in state government, and will serve only one term if elected. He's not accepting campaign donations, because he doesn't want to be beholden to any special interest groups, he said.
In the past, Hiebert has worked as roughneck in the oil field, as a nursing home aide, and has farmed. He said he's not currently employed because he's focusing on the race.
If elected, he said he plans to research the state lottery's contribution to education, concentrate on legislation that reduces crime and support measures that would benefit oil producers and reduce government spending.
Seriously, if you like the Iron Cross so much then maybe at least you could wear a World War 1 version without the swastika. Although I am sure he could find a military award that stand for 'honor & dignity' that doesn't come from a country & time period like Nazi Germany. But what do I know...
hotsauceman1 wrote:I used to have a wallet ith the iron cross. Its more or less a "Tough Guy" Biker kinda symbol now. The problem is that particular one he is wearing has the swastika on it.
No. The problem is my ancestors lost lives killing guys who had those. Time to take up the family occupation?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mannahnin wrote:If it walks like a skinhead douchebag, and talks like a skinhead douchebag, it's probably not a duck.
LoneLictor wrote:Just to make sure, there's no one here who thinks he's not racist, right?
I don't know for sure if he's racist, although I'm certainly not ruling it out. Judging from the article and the video though, at the very least he definitely seems like an idiot. It's quite possible that he's being serious and does only admire the positive aspects of the iron cross (courage, honor, valor, etc. etc.), and is just too dumb to realize that that doesn't undo the horrible, racist associations that the Nazis gave the medal, and doesn't realize that the vast majority of people will associate the medal, particularly the WWII-era version with a swastika, with the Nazis first and foremost.
Not that it really makes that much difference at this point whether he actually is racist or not, since I don't think there's any way he's going to actually win the election.
Hiebert said he is not a racist. He said people of American Indian descent help in his campaign, and he believes more history about indigenous Oklahomans should be taught in schools. He also believes Spanish language classes should be eliminated, and there is no need to incorporate more black history into teachers' lesson plans, he said.
“Mexico is a Third World country and Spain is economically folding,” Hiebert said. “I don't see any reason why our young people need to waste their time learning Spanish.”
Hiebert said he is not a racist. He said people of American Indian descent help in his campaign, and he believes more history about indigenous Oklahomans should be taught in schools. He also believes Spanish language classes should be eliminated, and there is no need to incorporate more black history into teachers' lesson plans, he said.
“Mexico is a Third World country and Spain is economically folding,” Hiebert said. “I don't see any reason why our young people need to waste their time learning Spanish.”
Sounds pretty racist to me.
It sounds pretty stupid, but I'm not sure how that quote alone is proof of racism. It certainly could be heading in that direction, but I don't think saying those things on their own necessarily makes someone racist. He thinks more native-American history should be taught and doesn't think more black history should be taught. He didn't say that black history shouldn't be taught, so maybe that means he just thinks enough black history is being taught already and more isn't needed, but not enough native-American history is so that should be increased? If he was in support of more "white history" being taught or something like that, then that would be a little more telling.
Plenty of non-racist people don't think foreign language classes are important and that people shouldn't waste their time on them. They're wrong, but that doesn't make them racist.
Note that I'm not defending the guy or saying that he definitely isn't racist. I think there's a good chance he is racist, I just don't think what he's said so far is definitive proof of that. It is proof of him having extremely poor judgement though.
He should have said the one he was wearing was part of his halloween costume, and the one on the wall behind him was because he's really into Black Templars.
Manchu wrote:So this is the guy who keeps posting here about his Nazi-themed IG army!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:I was going to order reproduction iron crosses for Warhammer costumes, but the only ones I could find were the WWII variant.
http://www.milprom.com/German/medals/index.htm
Less than halfway down the page.
Thanks for the link.
However, I am going to have to set straight the first comment...
Hordini wrote:I don't know for sure if he's racist, although I'm certainly not ruling it out. Judging from the article and the video though, at the very least he definitely seems like an idiot. It's quite possible that he's being serious and does only admire the positive aspects of the iron cross (courage, honor, valor, etc. etc.), and is just too dumb to realize that that doesn't undo the horrible, racist associations that the Nazis gave the medal, and doesn't realize that the vast majority of people will associate the medal, particularly the WWII-era version with a swastika, with the Nazis first and foremost.
He's racist, he's obviously racist. There's hardly a shortage of militaries with symbols for honour that aren't directly tied to the Nazis. Hell, there's plenty of German medals, including Iron Crosses, that don't have swastikas on them.
Also, he's a pretty big douche for wearing a medal he didn't win for actually being brave.
Not that it really makes that much difference at this point whether he actually is racist or not, since I don't think there's any way he's going to actually win the election.
Yeah, it's really important to point out that guys like this run fairly often, and lose. Society has basically moved past his kind of overt racism on the whole, so that while there's still enough out there to produce a regular stream of crazies running for political glory, it takes a freak circumstance for them to even have a chance at winning the Republican primary.
I think the bigger issue is that, well, I wrote Republican there for a reason. When crazies like this guy do run you don't even have to look to see which party they run for, there's always an R there. Here's a list of overtly racist people who've recently aimed for political office;
It's worth noting in every case that the Republican leadership moved against these guys as quickly as possible, and where proper elections were held these guys got curb-stomped. So credit to the Republican party and it's voting base for that, however they still need to take that next step and start thinking about why these guys keep getting drawn to their party, like moths to a flame. They need to start being honest about the race-baiting games they play, and the kind of people it attracts into the party.
hotsauceman1 wrote:I used to have a wallet ith the iron cross. Its more or less a "Tough Guy" Biker kinda symbol now. The problem is that particular one he is wearing has the swastika on it.
No. The problem is my ancestors lost lives killing guys who had those. Time to take up the family occupation?
Um what? re you saying you should kill me? The Iron cross isnt a nazi symbol much anymore. or at all. Alot more people see it as a symbol of rebellion. Thats why they sell jewelry with it as places like spencers gifts. Minus the swastika ofcourse
hotsauceman1 wrote:I used to have a wallet ith the iron cross. Its more or less a "Tough Guy" Biker kinda symbol now. The problem is that particular one he is wearing has the swastika on it.
No. The problem is my ancestors lost lives killing guys who had those. Time to take up the family occupation?
Um what? re you saying you should kill me? The Iron cross isnt a nazi symbol much anymore. or at all. Alot more people see it as a symbol of rebellion. Thats why they sell jewelry with it as places like spencers gifts. Minus the swastika ofcourse
Maybe you're an [EDITED BY FRAZZLED BECAUSE REDS8N IS RIGHT]? I'm not judging you. There's all kinds of reasons that people are [INSERT NEW HEP CAT PHRASE HERE]. And yes its still a symbol tied with Nazi Germany. Hanging out buying gak at Spencer's gifts doesn't mean, well gak. (wow Spencer's gifts is still around? Spencer's- taking fat vaguely smelly teenage boys' money for 40 years) Blah blah Swastika Native American / Buddhist blah blah. The people wearing them aren't native American and aren't Buddhists.
Outside of a historical context (reenactor, collect all kinds of medals) there's no reason to collect something that was part of a brutal psycho killer regime. Especially if you're US citizen. Edit; that was too harsh.
I will say, don't wear one around someone proud of their Russian or Polish heritage.
Whilst I broadly agree with your sentiments, at least with regards to what the symbol commonly stands for, if we could dial it back a wee bit with regards to the name calling it'd keep t'ings moving along more sweetly.
Monster Rain wrote:Generally speaking, unless you're seriously into ancient far-eastern mysticism, and even then you'll have some explaining to do, anything with a swastika on it is going to cause you no end of grief.
In Oklahoma you may get away with it if you are native-American, since they also used it historically.
I'm not sure why, but that just blew my mind.
See, that's actually comedy gold because a Nazi would take umbrage.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:I may as well say it before anybody else does, but the Iron Cross, like a lot of things, was corrupted by the Nazis. I may be wrong, and no doubt somebody will correct me, but I'm sure the Iron Cross goes back to Teutonic Knights and the Baltic crusades. It being a sort of 'muscular christianity. Also, the death's head symbol the SS used was Fredrick the great's honour guard? Or Medal for bravery??
Anyway, D-USA is right, if he wanted to use a symbol of honour, why not the Victoria Cross. I was going to mention MOH, but isn't it a federal offence for a non-winner of the MOH to wear it unless you're a relative of the winner??
I don't think the recipients or relatives of recipients of the VC would be very happy with it being used as a political symbol in some random guys campaign. It is a symbol of courage above and beyond the call of duty, has this guy ever performed any acts of bravery which qualify him for it?
Mind you, the same could be said of the Iron Cross and biker groups.
And yet, the funny thing is, people walk around with the hammer and sickle on t-shirts, Chairman Mao on t-shirts, and of course, goold old Che G, but nobody bats an eyelid.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:And yet, the funny thing is, people walk around with the hammer and sickle on t-shirts, Chairman Mao on t-shirts, and of course, goold old Che G, but nobody bats an eyelid.
Maybe there is a left-wing conspiracy
Well the thing is those actually are political symbols, or at least have become symbols since their death. I wear a Che t-shirt because I agree with some of his political ideas, such as universal healthcare and education and also his conviction to be willing to fight (and die) for these ideas. Of course he also did stuff which I do not agree with (concentration camps and executions) but you don't have to agree with everything someone did to think they're a hero or a good role model.
If they're being worn simply as a fashion statement though, that pisses me off. Still there's always the chance that these hipsters wander into one of the Cuban neighbourhoods in Miami in their Che t-shirt.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:And yet, the funny thing is, people walk around with the hammer and sickle on t-shirts, Chairman Mao on t-shirts, and of course, goold old Che G, but nobody bats an eyelid.
Frazzled wrote:
And yes its still a symbol tied with Nazi Germany. Hanging out buying gak at Spencer's gifts doesn't mean, well gak. (wow Spencer's gifts is still around? Spencer's- taking fat vaguely smelly teenage boys' money for 40 years)
The Iron Cross was donated in 1813 by King Friedrich Wilhem III. of Prussia, renewed in 1870 by King (later becoming the first Emperor) Wilhem I. and 1914 by Emperor Wilhelm II.. This was long before the NSDAP was even founded.
The Iron Cross is a symbol for prussian and german military valour, sacrifice & duty beyond the normal service. You shouldn't reduce it to the 6 years of use during WW2. Even then it stand for its original usage and not for the ideology of the nazis.
The idiot running around with a swastika adorned knights cross is just that: A racist idiot, who hasn't earned it and tries to use it for his own dumb political views. It's not the fault of the iron cross that idiots try to use it.
Frazzled wrote:
No. The problem is my ancestors lost lives killing guys who had those. Time to take up the family occupation?
So, should i warn middle, eastern and northern europe that your going to pay us a visit? You know, germans weren't the only ones who got iron crosses. There were austrians, dutch, norwegian, danes, romanians and others who got german military awards during WW2. But i'm going to assume that you just made a sarcastic statement to give an edge to your post.
The Iron Cross was donated in 1813 by King Friedrich Wilhem III. of Prussia, renewed in 1870 by King (later becoming the first Emperor) Wilhem I. and 1914 by Emperor Wilhelm II.. This was long before the NSDAP was even founded.
The Iron Cross is a symbol for prussian and german military valour, sacrifice & duty beyond the normal service. So what? Its also part of a murderous regime that thought it was a good idea to turn the USSR into Greater Germany, and help the indigenous populations by murderizing them. Of those concerned that this is symbol of German military pride As the immortatl bard once said: feth that.
You shouldn't reduce it to the 6 years of use during WW2. Even then it stand for its original usage and not for the ideology of the nazis.
Too bad. Next time don’t elect Austrian painters and have your generals collude in his rising to power and killing lots and lots and lots and lots and lots of people. Sorry, collectively your mancard is revoked until you find a cure for cancer or a longer lasting lightbulb. The Porsche 928 was a nice step in that direction. NOTE: regardless of the merits or your argument, he also had a swastika correct? He's not pining away for Otto von Bismark.
So, should i warn middle, eastern and northern europe that your going to pay us a visit? You know, germans weren't the only ones who got iron crosses. There were austrians, dutch, norwegian, danes, romanians and others who got german military awards during WW2. But i'm going to assume that you just made a sarcastic statement to give an edge to your post.
Sophistry. There would have been no supporters without the killer regime in the first place. Quit supporting a killer Nazi regime. Thinking anything was good or honorable from that time is both sad and pathetic.
Frazzled wrote:Quit supporting a killer Nazi regime.
That would have endangered their lives, and I suspect they valued them more than they valued those of others; and why shouldn't they?
I am referring to the poster. This is not applicable, unless the Space Nazis have already landed, in which case its time to sound the Horn of Great Wiener Dog Summoning, and unleash Dachshundskrieg.
Or nuke the site from orbit. Its the only way to be sure.
Frazzled wrote:Quit supporting a killer Nazi regime.
That would have endangered their lives, and I suspect they valued them more than they valued those of others; and why shouldn't they?
I am referring to the poster. This is not applicable, unless the Space Nazis have already landed, in which case its time to sound the Horn of Great Wiener Dog Summoning, and unleash Dachshundskrieg.
Or nuke the site from orbit. Its the only way to be sure.
My one good idea for the week.
Nuclear Powered Dachshunds. let God sort them out.
Recipients of the Knight’s Cross with Oak-Leaves, Swords and Diamonds
Date, Name,
Branch
15 July 1941
Werner Mölders
Air
28 January 1942
Adolf Galland
Air
August 1942
Gordon Gollob
Air
2 September 1942
Hans Joachim Marseille
Air
16 September 1942
Hermann Graf
Air
March 1943
Erwin Rommel
Army
9 August 1943
Wolfgang Luth
U boats
19 October 1943
Walter Nowotny
Air
14 December 1943
Adalbert Schulz
Army
29 March 1944
Hans Ulrich Rudel
Air
15 April 1944
Hyazinth Graf Strachwitz
Army
19 April 1944
Herbert Otto Gille
SS
April 1944
Hans Hube
Army
19 July 1944
Albert Kesselring
Army*
31 July 1944
Helmut Lent
Air
6 August 1944
Josef Dietrich
SS
17 August 1944
Walter Model
Army
25 August 1944
Erich Hartmann
Air
31 August 1944
Hermann Balck
Army
19 September 1944
Hermann Bernhard Ramcke
Army
9 October 1944
Hauptmann Heinz Wolfgang Schnaufer
Air
24 November 1944
Albrecht Brandi
U boats
1 January 1945
Ferdinand Schorner
Army
18 February 1945
Hasso von Manteuffel
Army
18 March 1945
Theodor Tolsdorf
Army
15 April 1945
Dr Karl Mauss
Army
8 May 1945
Dietrich von Saucken
Army
I do not think this caliber of an award was taking from these guys. Some you know some you don't. I do know one is the highest scoring ace in the world. 352 aireal kills
Frazzled wrote:Quit supporting a killer Nazi regime.
That would have endangered their lives, and I suspect they valued them more than they valued those of others; and why shouldn't they?
I am referring to the poster. This is not applicable, unless the Space Nazis have already landed, in which case its time to sound the Horn of Great Wiener Dog Summoning, and unleash Dachshundskrieg.
Or nuke the site from orbit. Its the only way to be sure.
My one good idea for the week.
Nuclear Powered Dachshunds. let God sort them out.
We will set you high in our councils Iur_tae_mont.
A Town Called Malus wrote:I wear a Che t-shirt because I agree with some of his political ideas, such as universal healthcare and education and also his conviction to be willing to fight (and die) for these ideas. Of course he also did stuff which I do not agree with (concentration camps and executions) but you don't have to agree with everything someone did to think they're a hero or a good role model.
You know there are people who support those things that didn't kill a bunch of people and advocate the killing of a bunch of people to achieve their political goals right? I always found it odd that people would try and associate themselves with him and at the same time distance themselves from him. Would you wear an Osama Bin Laden T-Shirt and call him a hero and say that you liked some of the things he stood for but didn't like the advocation of the killing of others? No no, the thing is is that Che he is a popular faux political celebrity. It isn't hard to find other left leaning people that weren't murderer's, but they make for less compelling T-Shirts.
A Town Called Malus wrote:I wear a Che t-shirt because I agree with some of his political ideas, such as universal healthcare and education and also his conviction to be willing to fight (and die) for these ideas. Of course he also did stuff which I do not agree with (concentration camps and executions) but you don't have to agree with everything someone did to think they're a hero or a good role model.
You know there are people who support those things that didn't kill a bunch of people and advocate the killing of a bunch of people to achieve their political goals right? I always found it odd that people would try and associate themselves with him and at the same time distance themselves from him. Would you wear an Osama Bin Laden T-Shirt and call him a hero and say that you liked some of the things he stood for but didn't like the advocation of the killing of others? No no, the thing is is that Che he is a popular faux political celebrity. It isn't hard to find other left leaning people that weren't murderer's, but they make for less compelling T-Shirts.
A Town Called Malus wrote:I wear a Che t-shirt because I agree with some of his political ideas, such as universal healthcare and education and also his conviction to be willing to fight (and die) for these ideas. Of course he also did stuff which I do not agree with (concentration camps and executions) but you don't have to agree with everything someone did to think they're a hero or a good role model.
You know there are people who support those things that didn't kill a bunch of people and advocate the killing of a bunch of people to achieve their political goals right? I always found it odd that people would try and associate themselves with him and at the same time distance themselves from him. Would you wear an Osama Bin Laden T-Shirt and call him a hero and say that you liked some of the things he stood for but didn't like the advocation of the killing of others? No no, the thing is is that Che he is a popular faux political celebrity. It isn't hard to find other left leaning people that weren't murderer's, but they make for less compelling T-Shirts.
I can't think of anything Bin Laden stood for that didn't involve killing people. Che said that violence should only be a last resort when all diplomatic and democratic options had failed. Bin Laden used violence as his first resort and targeted civilians. He and Che are nothing alike. The people who were executed after the Cuban revolution were all put on trial. You might argue that those trials were not entirely fair and you'd probably be right but it at least had the semblance of law, it wasn't just Che shooting random people.
I don't distance myself from Che's questionable actions. To do that I would refuse to acknowledge or ignore the things he did which I don't agree with. I don't do that, I accept him and his actions for what they were. He was a fair man who treated others with respect. During his military campaigns he never executed prisoners of war and he always treated the enemy wounded as well as he did his own men, which is more than can be said for what Batistas forces did to revolutionaries they captured.
Calling Che a murderer is akin to calling every man who administers a lethal injection a murderer or every soldier a murderer. Che did not pass judgement on those who were executed, that was done by a separate tribunal and the majority of the Cuban public supported the executions at the time.
What im saying man is that symbols change, people dont see the iron cross as a symbol of hatred anymore, Just like many do not see the "Confederate" flag as hatred anymore, but one of southern pride.
What im saying man is that symbols change, people dont see the iron cross as a symbol of hatred anymore, Just like many do not see the "Confederate" flag as hatred anymore, but one of southern pride.
There are many who see the confederate flag as a hatred thing.
I was trying to figure out what kind of "southern pride" rednecks in Illinois and Indiana have when I saw them there.
What im saying man is that symbols change, people dont see the iron cross as a symbol of hatred anymore, Just like many do not see the "Confederate" flag as hatred anymore, but one of southern pride.
1. Some symbols change. This one hasn't outside the rarified air of Spencers (does Spencer's still smell? )
2. The Confederate flag a symbol of Southern Pride? Really? At a Klan rally maybe.
Lets test this. Get one. Now walk around with it in Mississippii and tell everyone you meet its not about hatred. Nothing could possibly go wrong with that.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
d-usa wrote:
hotsauceman1 wrote:
Frazzled wrote:Snip
What im saying man is that symbols change, people dont see the iron cross as a symbol of hatred anymore, Just like many do not see the "Confederate" flag as hatred anymore, but one of southern pride.
There are many who see the confederate flag as a hatred thing.
I was trying to figure out what kind of "southern pride" rednecks in Illinois and Indiana have when I saw them there.
Maybe they had great pride in their British heritage, but were woefully ignorant of what the British flag actually looks like?
The iron cross has been used a lot by bikers in recent years. I don't know if it's just meant to be a coded racist thing, but I don't believe it's assumed to be.
Found something on it, called the Biker Cross:
Spoiler:
The Biker Cross is a derivative of the Iron Cross (a Prussian, and later German, military decoration). Bikers started to display the Iron Cross in the mid 1960′s with the advent of outlaw biker gangs. Originally bikers displayed the Iron Cross as a symbol of rebellion to society in general. Today it is also worn to signify honor, valor, strength and ‘standing up for what you believe.’
Hot rodders (American car customizers) and others use it as a provocative gesture to offend the public, or as a symbol of rebellion or non-conformity. In the 1960s, the Iron Cross was adopted by American surfers, who started wearing medals plundered from their fathers. Volkswagen enthusiasts, particularly Volksrodders, often use the Iron Cross as a symbol that reflects the car’s country of origin. Ed Roth created accessories for surfers, hot rodders and bikers derived from German World War II trophies.
Modern biker crosses can vary in shape and internal designs since often they are personalized to reflect personal beliefs, life styles and/or organizations. For example a biker that rides British motorcycles may display a cross with a Union Jack overlay known as a British Biker Cross. A biker that is also a Christian and is proud to display his or her Christian beliefs may choose to display a Christian Biker Cross that is a combination of the Maltese Cross and Iron Cross that has the lower tang stretched out to represent a Crucifix. A patriotic American Biker may choose to display a cross with the American Flag stars and stripes on it such as the American Old Glory Cross.
http://pbmo.wordpress.com/2011/03/22/biker-cross/#more-7517
The confederate battle flag is most commonly associated with racism. Some people try to associate it with Southern pride/having positive feelings about the Civil War, but those are mostly fools ignoring the primary reasons for the Civil War.
I don't generally see anyone wearing t-shirts with a hammer & sickle or Mao on them. Che is a bit of an unusual case. Folks do often see him as an idealistic revolutionary (see The Motorcycle Diaries), maybe akin to our own Founding Fathers. Our revolution was pretty nasty in places too.
Mannahnin wrote:The iron cross has been used a lot by bikers in recent years. I don't know if it's just meant to be a coded racist thing, but I don't believe it's assumed to be.
Found something on it, called the Biker Cross:
Spoiler:
The Biker Cross is a derivative of the Iron Cross (a Prussian, and later German, military decoration). Bikers started to display the Iron Cross in the mid 1960′s with the advent of outlaw biker gangs. Originally bikers displayed the Iron Cross as a symbol of rebellion to society in general. Today it is also worn to signify honor, valor, strength and ‘standing up for what you believe.’
Hot rodders (American car customizers) and others use it as a provocative gesture to offend the public, or as a symbol of rebellion or non-conformity. In the 1960s, the Iron Cross was adopted by American surfers, who started wearing medals plundered from their fathers. Volkswagen enthusiasts, particularly Volksrodders, often use the Iron Cross as a symbol that reflects the car’s country of origin. Ed Roth created accessories for surfers, hot rodders and bikers derived from German World War II trophies.
Modern biker crosses can vary in shape and internal designs since often they are personalized to reflect personal beliefs, life styles and/or organizations. For example a biker that rides British motorcycles may display a cross with a Union Jack overlay known as a British Biker Cross. A biker that is also a Christian and is proud to display his or her Christian beliefs may choose to display a Christian Biker Cross that is a combination of the Maltese Cross and Iron Cross that has the lower tang stretched out to represent a Crucifix. A patriotic American Biker may choose to display a cross with the American Flag stars and stripes on it such as the American Old Glory Cross.
http://pbmo.wordpress.com/2011/03/22/biker-cross/#more-7517
The confederate battle flag is most commonly associated with racism. Some people try to associate it with Southern pride/having positive feelings about the Civil War, but those are mostly fools ignoring the primary reasons for the Civil War.
I don't generally see anyone wearing t-shirts with a hammer & sickle or Mao on them. Che is a bit of an unusual case. Folks do often see him as an idealistic revolutionary (see The Motorcycle Diaries), maybe akin to our own Founding Fathers. Our revolution was pretty nasty in places too.
Well the Iron Cross (as in pre Nazi sign for Germany) etc. is fine. Wearing an Iron Cross and being around swastikas is whole different intent.
Its the same with the Confederate Battle Flag. Showing Dixie as part of a re-enactment? Cool. Showing it as one of the many flags that have flown over Texas? Cool. Putting a big flag next to your iron cross on the back of your double dooley diesel pickup?
A Town Called Malus wrote:I can't think of anything Bin Laden stood for that didn't involve killing people.
Then you don't really understand what we are up against.
If you think this looks odd, then apply that same logic to your self.
Spoiler:
He is popular in other parts of the world becuase, like Che, he is seen as the scrappy underdog who fought the West.
A Town Called Malus wrote:Che said that violence should only be a last resort when all diplomatic and democratic options had failed.
People say all sorts of things, but their actions speak to where the truth lies. He was more than happy to apply violence if he didn't get what he wanted. There are people that won't, and never have, killed anyone to see their political goals met, but you won't wear their t-shirt.
A Town Called Malus wrote:Bin Laden used violence as his first resort and targeted civilians.
He would tell you, like your buddy Che, that it was a last resort. It also shows how little you understand of OBL. He also pretended to be a man of peace forced into an untenable position where he had no choice but to start killing people.
A Town Called Malus wrote:He and Che are nothing alike.
Except for, you know, being alike. The difference between the two is that you like some of Che's ideas.
A Town Called Malus wrote:at least had the semblance of law, it wasn't just Che shooting random people.
That is just a load of crap from the beginning to the end. Oh, and word to the wise, you are showing your ingnorance again. While terrorist attacks, much like Che's, don't always know each person by heart, they aren't random. The Twin Towers were chosen very specifically, as was the Pentagon.
A Town Called Malus wrote:I don't distance myself from Che's questionable actions.
No, you delude yourself of the truth of his actions and rationalize it.
A Town Called Malus wrote:his military campaigns he never executed prisoners of war and he always treated the enemy wounded as well as he did his own men, which is more than can be said for what Batistas forces did to revolutionaries they captured.
"His military" was a military in the same sense as the Taliban, Al Qeada, and the Sandinistas. I suppose the Taliban would be the most appropriate becuase like Che's terrorist, sorry, guerilla fighters, also were able to succeed. Everything after that sounds like you got it out of a pamphlet being handed out on May Day.
A Town Called Malus wrote:Calling Che a murderer is akin to calling every man who administers a lethal injection a murderer or every soldier a murderer.
If you want to remove all context, sure you can make that argument. It doesn't hold up well, but you can make it.
A Town Called Malus wrote:Che did not pass judgement on those who were executed, that was done by a separate tribunal and the majority of the Cuban public supported the executions at the time.
I love the idea that a tribunal set up by radical terrorist group that has seized power is fair and just. I'm sure when the Taliban set up shop in Afghanistan they were fair and just as well.
Che is an interesting historical figure and certainly worth discussing, but wearing on a T-Shirt like he's a celebrity while trying to distance yourself from the reality of his actions comes across as both incredibly naive and disingenuous. You can't promote peaceful change and violent overthrow at the same time.
A Town Called Malus wrote:I can't think of anything Bin Laden stood for that didn't involve killing people.
Then you don't really understand what we are up against.
If you think this looks odd, then apply that same logic to your self.
Spoiler:
He is popular in other parts of the world becuase, like Che, he is seen as the scrappy underdog who fought the West.
Unlike Che, he never made any attempts to bring about reform through peaceful means.
A Town Called Malus wrote:Che said that violence should only be a last resort when all diplomatic and democratic options had failed.
People say all sorts of things, but their actions speak to where the truth lies. He was more than happy to apply violence if he didn't get what he wanted. There are people that won't, and never have, killed anyone to see their political goals met, but you won't wear their t-shirt.
He was prepared to use violence. Just like the founding fathers of your country were prepared to use violence. Just like the rebels in Syria and Egypt were prepared to use violence. Sure he's no Gandhi but Gandhi's non-violent protests would not have worked against the Batista regime. Would non-violent protest on its own have brought down Gaddafi? Probably not. Non-violence only works when the thing you are against cares about international perception of it, like the Civil Rights movement in the USA and Gandhi's independence movement in India.
A Town Called Malus wrote:Bin Laden used violence as his first resort and targeted civilians.
He would tell you, like your buddy Che, that it was a last resort. It also shows how little you understand of OBL. He also pretended to be a man of peace forced into an untenable position where he had no choice but to start killing people.
Did OBL ever try to negotiate with the USA before launching the 9/11 attacks? No? Then violence was not the last resort. Also, unlike my buddy Che, he targeted civilians. The Pentagon was a military target but there were no military personnel in the Twin Towers. The attack on them served no purpose but to spread fear into the population and to kill thousands of innocent people.
A Town Called Malus wrote:He and Che are nothing alike.
Except for, you know, being alike. The difference between the two is that you like some of Che's ideas.
Except for, you know, being completely different. The similarity is you don't like any of Che's ideas.
A Town Called Malus wrote:at least had the semblance of law, it wasn't just Che shooting random people.
That is just a load of crap from the beginning to the end. Oh, and word to the wise, you are showing your ingnorance again. While terrorist attacks, much like Che's, don't always know each person by heart, they aren't random. The Twin Towers were chosen very specifically, as was the Pentagon.
Che did not use terrorism tactics. He never worked to promote terror in the populace. The Cuban revolutionary forces never purposefully attacked non-military targets. They didn't bomb schools or churches. They fought, in uniform, against a clearly defined enemy, the Cuban military under the command of Batista and his generals.
A Town Called Malus wrote:I don't distance myself from Che's questionable actions.
No, you delude yourself of the truth of his actions and rationalize it.
The truth of his actions is that he oversaw the appeals of prisoners charged with war crimes, facing the death penalty. That he led a group of men in combat in Cuba, the Congo and Bolivia and practiced a strict code of conduct with regards to the treatment of the enemy, the local population and his own forces.
A Town Called Malus wrote:his military campaigns he never executed prisoners of war and he always treated the enemy wounded as well as he did his own men, which is more than can be said for what Batistas forces did to revolutionaries they captured.
"His military" was a military in the same sense as the Taliban, Al Qeada, and the Sandinistas. I suppose the Taliban would be the most appropriate becuase like Che's terrorist, sorry, guerilla fighters, also were able to succeed. Everything after that sounds like you got it out of a pamphlet being handed out on May Day.
No it was not. The cuban revolutionary forces under Castro all wore uniforms, with a set chain of command. They were a recognisable military force, the Taliban is not. As for getting it out of a May Day pamphlet, try again. It's actually from his own words in "Guerilla Warfare", "Reminiscences of the Cuban Revolutionary War", "The Congo Diaries" and the "Bolivian Diaries". Are you trying to deny that Batistas army committed war crimes? Or that Che did not practice what he preached in regards to treatment of wounded enemy soldiers and prisoners of war?
A Town Called Malus wrote:Calling Che a murderer is akin to calling every man who administers a lethal injection a murderer or every soldier a murderer.
If you want to remove all context, sure you can make that argument. It doesn't hold up well, but you can make it.
What context? These people were found guilty by a court of war crimes and executed. If they were not guilty then it is not the fault of the executioner but of the court itself. Apart from that Che only ever killed in combat and never after the enemy had surrendered.
A Town Called Malus wrote:Che did not pass judgement on those who were executed, that was done by a separate tribunal and the majority of the Cuban public supported the executions at the time.
I love the idea that a tribunal set up by radical terrorist group that has seized power is fair and just. I'm sure when the Taliban set up shop in Afghanistan they were fair and just as well.
The Cuban Revolutionary forces were not a radical terrorist group. They did not use terror tactics to achieve their goals and never directed any attacks at civilians. The Taliban, on the other hand, did.
Then lets look at differences between the Cuban government and the Taliban when they were in power. In Cuba there was a huge education and health drive which has resulted in Cuba having a better adult literacy rate than both the UK and the USA. The Taliban on the other hand went on a huge anti-education drive and kept its people in poverty and under-educated for god knows how many years. So that's pretty much the polar opposite.
Che is an interesting historical figure and certainly worth discussing, but wearing on a T-Shirt like he's a celebrity while trying to distance yourself from the reality of his actions comes across as both incredibly naive and disingenuous. You can't promote peaceful change and violent overthrow at the same time.
I repeat, I am not trying to distance myself. I believe that capital punishment is wrong but that if you face an oppressive regime which cannot be defeated by peaceful means then you should be prepared to fight it with violent means in order to bring about change.
Peaceful change is better, no argument, but it is also not always possible. When it is impossible you have a choice, you either give up or you fight.
Your rose coloured history glasses, while pretty, betray your bias. For instance:
A Town Called Malus wrote:The similarity is you don't like any of Che's ideas.
Find anywhere in the thread where I said I didn't like any of his ideas, outside of his use of killing to meet political desires. Also, find where I said the US was perfect and without room for criticism.
You won't find them becuase they don't exist. You are falling into the lazy minds trap that if someone disagrees with you on one thing, they must disagree with you on all things. I can find Che to be a poor role model while thinking that Universal Health Care may not be a bad idea while also being critical of the governments use of force in The War on Terror, or War on Drugs for the matter.
When you wear the shirt you are saying that you are ok with advocating violent overthrow. If you aren't you should wear a different shirt, if you are, at least admit it. You can't have it both ways. I personally don't believe in killing other people because all my political ideals are not catered to. I'll wear a MLK T-Shirt or Ghandi shirt before I wear a Che shirt.
I also can't help be think you, essentially, calling me a conservative American gave at least a few people on the board a huge belly laugh.
Ahtman wrote:Your rose coloured history glasses, while pretty, betray your bias. For instance:
A Town Called Malus wrote:The similarity is you don't like any of Che's ideas.
Find anywhere in the thread where I said I didn't like any of his ideas, outside of his use of killing to meet political desires. Also, find where I said the US was perfect and without room for criticism.
You won't find them becuase they don't exist. You are falling into the lazy minds trap that if someone disagrees with you on one thing, they must disagree with you on all things. I can find Che to be a poor role model while thinking that Universal Health Care may not be a bad idea while also being critical of the governments use of force in The War on Terror, or War on Drugs for the matter.
When you wear the shirt you are saying that you are ok with advocating violent overthrow. If you aren't you should wear a different shirt, if you are, at least admit it. You can't have it both ways. I personally don't believe in killing other people because all my political ideals are not catered to. I'll wear a MLK T-Shirt or Ghandi shirt before I wear a Che shirt.
I also can't help be think you, essentially, calling me a conservative American gave at least a few people on the board a huge belly laugh.
Fair enough and I apologise for any assumptions I have made.
I am OK with advocating violent overthrow but, as I have said, only as a last resort and only when there is absolutely no chance of peaceful protest succeeding. Until that point is met then it is not justified. So in a country like North Korea where there is pretty much no chance of peaceful protest succeeding I would support an armed uprising (admittedly the chances of that happening are pretty much nil with the brainwashing that happens in North Korean schools).
Ahtman wrote:Your rose coloured history glasses, while pretty, betray your bias. For instance:
A Town Called Malus wrote:The similarity is you don't like any of Che's ideas.
Find anywhere in the thread where I said I didn't like any of his ideas, outside of his use of killing to meet political desires. Also, find where I said the US was perfect and without room for criticism.
You won't find them becuase they don't exist. You are falling into the lazy minds trap that if someone disagrees with you on one thing, they must disagree with you on all things. I can find Che to be a poor role model while thinking that Universal Health Care may not be a bad idea while also being critical of the governments use of force in The War on Terror, or War on Drugs for the matter.
When you wear the shirt you are saying that you are ok with advocating violent overthrow. If you aren't you should wear a different shirt, if you are, at least admit it. You can't have it both ways. I personally don't believe in killing other people because all my political ideals are not catered to. I'll wear a MLK T-Shirt or Ghandi shirt before I wear a Che shirt.
I also can't help be think you, essentially, calling me a conservative American gave at least a few people on the board a huge belly laugh.
Fair enough and I apologise for any assumptions I have made.
I am OK with advocating violent overthrow but, as I have said, only as a last resort and only when there is absolutely no chance of peaceful protest succeeding. Until that point is met then it is not justified. So in a country like North Korea where there is pretty much no chance of peaceful protest succeeding I would support an armed uprising (admittedly the chances of that happening are pretty much nil with the brainwashing that happens in North Korean schools).
Thats too easy. Would you support armed insurrection in the US to meet your goals?
Ahtman wrote:Your rose coloured history glasses, while pretty, betray your bias. For instance:
A Town Called Malus wrote:The similarity is you don't like any of Che's ideas.
Find anywhere in the thread where I said I didn't like any of his ideas, outside of his use of killing to meet political desires. Also, find where I said the US was perfect and without room for criticism.
You won't find them becuase they don't exist. You are falling into the lazy minds trap that if someone disagrees with you on one thing, they must disagree with you on all things. I can find Che to be a poor role model while thinking that Universal Health Care may not be a bad idea while also being critical of the governments use of force in The War on Terror, or War on Drugs for the matter.
When you wear the shirt you are saying that you are ok with advocating violent overthrow. If you aren't you should wear a different shirt, if you are, at least admit it. You can't have it both ways. I personally don't believe in killing other people because all my political ideals are not catered to. I'll wear a MLK T-Shirt or Ghandi shirt before I wear a Che shirt.
I also can't help be think you, essentially, calling me a conservative American gave at least a few people on the board a huge belly laugh.
Fair enough and I apologise for any assumptions I have made.
I am OK with advocating violent overthrow but, as I have said, only as a last resort and only when there is absolutely no chance of peaceful protest succeeding. Until that point is met then it is not justified. So in a country like North Korea where there is pretty much no chance of peaceful protest succeeding I would support an armed uprising (admittedly the chances of that happening are pretty much nil with the brainwashing that happens in North Korean schools).
Thats too easy. Would you support armed insurrection in the US to meet your goals?
No, because you have a democratic system and therefore there is the possibility of accomplishing those goals peacefully.
Ahtman wrote:I also can't help be think you, essentially, calling me a conservative American gave at least a few people on the board a huge belly laugh.
I won't say that there was a belly-laugh, but I definitely let loose with a bemused chuckle.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:And yet, the funny thing is, people walk around with the hammer and sickle on t-shirts, Chairman Mao on t-shirts, and of course, goold old Che G, but nobody bats an eyelid.
Maybe there is a left-wing conspiracy
People who wear Che shirts and Hammer & Sickle shirts do so because they like the romance of the promise of such a system. They're stupid for not realising how badly these regimes failed in those promises, but that's all it is, stupidity.
Whereas the Nazis delivered exactly what they said they were going to deliver. They didn't descend into hate filled racism, that was their very reason for existing in the first place. Anyone who takes up that symbol now is embracing that racism.
Neither the stupidity in wearing a Che t-shirt, nor the racism in wearing a swastika is good, but they are also very different things.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
A Town Called Malus wrote:He and Che are nothing alike. The people who were executed after the Cuban revolution were all put on trial. You might argue that those trials were not entirely fair and you'd probably be right but it at least had the semblance of law, it wasn't just Che shooting random people.
Probably weren't fair? Seriously? They were kangaroo courts, and while they were certainly popular with the Cuban people at the time that does not make them just.
Calling Che a murderer is akin to calling every man who administers a lethal injection a murderer or every soldier a murderer. Che did not pass judgement on those who were executed, that was done by a separate tribunal and the majority of the Cuban public supported the executions at the time.
No, seriously, read about Che's actions during the revolution. He routinely executed revolutionary soldiers suspected of treason or cowardice.
Comparing him to bin Laden is typical internet silliness, but don't think he wasn't a brutal killer.
Ahtman wrote:He is popular in other parts of the world becuase, like Che, he is seen as the scrappy underdog who fought the West.
Hitler is popular in the same way in India, where among the group of people educated enough to be interested in world events, but not educated enough to know very much about them, he's seen as a man of action. Mein Kampf continues to sell there in pretty good numbers.
I'm not a fan of Hitler or the Nazi party. Off the top of my head there's like 2 version of Hitler. Hitler who rose Germany out of their situation and should have left it at that. Then there's Hitler who we all know right after he invaded Poland which pretty much went down hill from there.
A Town Called Malus wrote:I am OK with advocating violent overthrow but, as I have said, only as a last resort and only when there is absolutely no chance of peaceful protest succeeding. Until that point is met then it is not justified. So in a country like North Korea where there is pretty much no chance of peaceful protest succeeding I would support an armed uprising (admittedly the chances of that happening are pretty much nil with the brainwashing that happens in North Korean schools).
The idea that everyone in North Korea is entirely brainwashed is basically a myth. There's an enormous amount of black market trade across the border into China. North Koreans know the government line is a lie.
It's just that exactly that influences people's thinking is really complicated. They can reject part of the government lie, while still believing other parts that make it easier for them to go to work everyday for that same government. And even if they reject all of it, exactly what do they do about - keep their heads down and look after their families, same as people have done in every despotic regime.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Jihadin wrote:Want to point out...either you misread or misinformed but the key word that stands out......suspected
Uh, no, I wrote that word because it's exactly what I meant to write. People were accused of treason or cowardice, and he ordered their execution, and sometimes shot them himself. It's why his own army was afraid of him.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Jihadin wrote:I'm not a fan of Hitler or the Nazi party. Off the top of my head there's like 2 version of Hitler. Hitler who rose Germany out of their situation and should have left it at that. Then there's Hitler who we all know right after he invaded Poland which pretty much went down hill from there.
While Germany did recover under Hitler's early chancellorship, the idea that until that point he was doing just fine is kind of the Fisher Price view of politics. A lot of the growth was the result of programs put into place before he came to power, especially the road network. Second up, the growth he did achieve was through stuff that wasn't sustainable, it was real house of cards stuff. And long before the invasion of Poland he was a collosal dick to minorities in Germany, as well as to anyone that spoke out against him (read about what happened to the Austrian government and military officers that spoke out during annexation).
Basically Hitler was the head of a band of murderous thugs, who had to keep expanding and grabbing more power, not only because of the nature of who they were, but because if they ever stopped grabbing power the whole thing was certain to collapse in on itself.
A Town Called Malus wrote:Non-violence only works when the thing you are against cares about international perception of it, like the Civil Rights movement in the USA and Gandhi's independence movement in India.
Not true. Non-violence only works when the regime isn't willing to kill you, or when there are simply too many of you to kill. International perception might factor in, but it doesn't have to.
A Town Called Malus wrote:
Did OBL ever try to negotiate with the USA before launching the 9/11 attacks? No? Then violence was not the last resort.
Thanks to the Bastards, I cant help but pronounce Nazi the same way Lt Aldo Rain did How would you spell it that way anyways? Nat-zee? Nayt-zee? Something like that
[img]
People don't get to set their own meanings for symbols. You can't fly a Nazi flag as a symbol of anti smoking laws and expect it to be accepted.
