symbol meanings

VonYinzer said:
Im sorry SF... I shouldve been more clear. I certainly didnt mean to infer that all proud southerners are racist. My only point was that the Confederate flag has now become a symbol that is unfortunatly used by the lower forms of life nationwide as a badge of ignorant, racist honor. Even though it once stood for something proud and noble to many, as did the swastika, iron cross, pentogram, eye of horus, etc... All I was trying to state was that its another once respectable and powerful symbol that has been turned into something ugly and far removed from its original stature by those with hate and blind rage in their black hearts. Hope ya dont think I was being an ass.
Click to expand...
ThAT

Uh, it was a flag flown by those who took up arms against the United States of America with the intention of destroying the union. USA I say, not CSA! The so-called southern heritage rhetoric is weak. We all know good and well that those who display that rag are doing so to make a statement and shock others. As for the other abhorrent symbols of humanity's darkest days, us regular folks rail against them out of COMMON DECENCY. There is no philosophical discourse here.
 
So by your thinking, any Brit should be terribly offended by the American flag? And every American Indian should be burning every symbol of this nation?
 
I think the worst misunderstanding in this kind of discussion is the fact that we overlook the intention of the person behind the symbol. A symbol by itself takes on the attitude and interpretation of the viewer. True that the swazi ablaze on a red flag carried by a neo-fascist "pure breed" sporting a retro SS uni as he marches on juneteenth with a herd of like minded jackholes is a negative thing. If you strip everything away but the symbol the only thing left is your mental image of the previously mentioned jackholes on parade. You infuse the meaning, not the symbol itself.

The symbol itself is neutral, but is empowered by the users intent, the complete circumstance, and the viewers perceptions. If it is used to shock (and here is the secret Tinkerbell), it is only shocking if you allow it. Personally when I see a douche, for whatever reason, sharing his swazi pride I laugh (usually on the inside) because the guy suffers from a malfunction of some kind. Either a neo-nazi, a vain attempt to get the attention mommy didn't give, or someone who thinks they can subvert the negative connotations born of one of the greatest atrocities of all time.

If you hail from or just respect the cultural heritage of the swamis, native shamans, etc... that used the symbol in a positive way then it is your duty to that tradition to use the symbol appropriately, and in a setting where it's intent is obvious. If you slap a reverse 'eastern' swastika on your tank all by itself as your little personal joke you deserve the fist in the face you'll likely get at some point. That being said that fist isn't likely to come from me because my forefathers imparted me with common sense and a rich symbolic heritage.

Most symbols are a mirror, like an ancient warshak test, divining the mindset of the viewer. So if you're offended by someones use of any symbol just ask yourself why you're so angry before you cut 'em down. Even if they are jack-booted ass clowns, the people that should be most offended by the symbol fought, suffered, lived, and died so that we would all have the right to have and express an opinion.

Just my $0.02, keep the change.
 
biker_reject said:
ThAT

Uh, it was a flag flown by those who took up arms against the United States of America with the intention of destroying the union. USA I say, not CSA! The so-called southern heritage rhetoric is weak. We all know good and well that those who display that rag are doing so to make a statement and shock others. As for the other abhorrent symbols of humanity's darkest days, us regular folks rail against them out of COMMON DECENCY. There is no philosophical discourse here.
Click to expand...
This is why the term "ignorance is bliss" was coined. Such close-mindedness is what is abhorrent.

The English settlers who came to America and established the colonies on stolen Native American land did so to be an indivdual establishment of colonies free of the religious and other tyronies set forth by the English government. The Confederate states wished to remain seperate and have each be in control of their own government and laws. The Union did not so see fit. They wanted to become a united nation. We all can clearly see how it turned out.

The war was NOT about slavery. There were slaves in both the union and the confedracy. They were much more previlant in the confederate states due to the vast amounts of fertile land in the south as well as the more aclimate weather. There were less of these in the north, but they were still there.

Another thing you must remember is these slaves were slaves in their own countries and were traded or sold by their owners. Many were treated very well, especially considering the conditions from where they came from. Of course there were others who did not get treated fairly at all, but that doesn't change that most were given the views of their time.
 
charlesskelter said:
This is why the term "ignorance is bliss" was coined. Such close-mindedness is what is abhorrent.

The English settlers who came to America and established the colonies on stolen Native American land.
Click to expand...


So did every other culture in the history of man. Whats your point? Should Germany give back Prussia? Should the Brits give back the Balkans? Should the US pull out of Cuba?
 
charlesskelter said:
Another thing you must remember is these slaves were slaves in their own countries and were traded or sold by their owners. Many were treated very well, especially considering the conditions from where they came from. Of course there were others who did not get treated fairly at all, but that doesn't change that most were given the views of their time.
Click to expand...

Ummm... I was with ya until this... "Many were treated very well..." Seriously? Thats an insane comment. Any human being held in a form of forced servitude cannot be described as being "treated very well". These people were denied the basic human rights all men and woman should be given. I dont care how nice their living quaters were, or how nice their captors were to them, they WERE STILL SLAVES!!!!! Jeez man... Thats like saying that it was ok that the US locked up every person of Japanese descent we could during WW2 because we gave them decent places to live. They were still prisoners, and its still wrong. Im sorry but under NO circumstances is it acceptable to defend ANY part of the slave trade. EVER.
 
Basement rat said:
So did every other culture in the history of man. Whats your point? Should Germany give back Prussia? Should the Brits give back the Balkans? Should the US pull out of Cuba?
Click to expand...

My point is that the US was founded on the very same actions that he's bitching about. People are too worried about ownership, when in reality the land was there before and will be there after and it should be free to be used by anyone. This country was founded on murder. But everyone likes to overlook that.
 
VonYinzer said:
Ummm... I was with ya until this... "Many were treated very well..." Seriously? Thats an insane comment. Any human being held in a form of forced servitude cannot be described as being "treated very well". These people were denied the basic human rights all men and woman should be given. I dont care how nice their living quaters were, or how nice their captors were to them, they WERE STILL SLAVES!!!!! Jeez man... Thats like saying that it was ok that the US locked up every person of Japanese descent we could during WW2 because we gave them decent places to live. They were still prisoners, and its still wrong. Im sorry but under NO circumstances is it acceptable to defend ANY part of the slave trade. EVER.
Click to expand...

The views of the time were for the most part that slave ownership was widely accepted. That is how they were aquired, they were slaves in Africa then they were slaves in America. Look at the way slaves were treated in Egypt. They were treated very well comparably. Even the slaves in Africa at the same time period were treated much worse. I'm not arguing for slavery, just comparing the life they had vs. The ones they got here. The entire situation is shitty, but there will never be equal rights. Slavery is no longer an issue (in the US) but it's still constantly brought up. Move on, my point was the Confederate flag does not represent slavery. If you didn't get my point, sorry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DTT Light or Dark

  • DTT Light
    • www.jadusmotorcycleparts.com
    www.lostapostle.ca/
    www.sparckmoto.com

    Spread the Love

    Back
    Top Bottom