New Sponsor

[maria]

Neither of those is a swastika. A swastika is a very unique design (and, of course, predates Nazism).

The latter is an excuse conveniently used by fascists the world around. Google "Lithuania swastika," and see how, after a law was passed banning the use of both the swastika and the hammer and sickle, for "historical" reasons, the swastika was relegalized.

The crosshairs have been used by a white pride organisation, but I don't think that makes them a swastika

I didn't say the Investec logo was a swastika. I said it looked like a cross between a Celtic cross and a Swastika, with a touch of Stone Island thrown in for good measure.

Like I said, it breaks the angular symmetry of a swastika (that would be the middle image below), but you get my drift.

...bit of a stretch, no?

 

[Éperons]

What you are doing is changing the shape to something else.

Not to be a dick, but please go back and reread the part you cut, about the logo's being a mix of fascist symbolism. Again, I literally never said "the Investec logo is a swastika", which is the point against which you are arguing.

As for curving the swastika, despite its idealised square version, that was a move that the Nazis brought to the table, meaning the logo could be stylised to suit their needs.

Finally, in countries where using swastikas are against the law (like in Lithuania until recently), fascists have gotten around it with swastika-like imagery that manage to suggest both a swastika and a Celtic cross at the same time. See, for example, the photo gallery here, which shows a pathetic little fascist meeting in Kaunas:

http://www.lrytas.lt/-11826071821182325 ... raukos.htm

 

[Éperons]

...bit of a stretch, no?

Of course. Which is why I never said "The Investec logo is a swastika". It's much closer to a Celtic cross for me, in fact. The breaks in the circle merely suggest the breaks in the swastika.

I suppose the issue may be that the swastika is much more "obviously" a fascist symbol than the Celtic cross? I don't know, but they're both loathsome in my opinion. The fact that the Investec logo manages to suggest both is what's troubling.

Look, if people are cool with wearing the logo, then fine. I don't mind. I've made my case. I won't call you a Nazi for wearing an Investec shirt. I just find their logo thick-headed in general, and I think it has no business in football.

 

[Smoked Salmon]

What you are doing is changing the shape to something else.

Not to be a dick, but please go back and reread the part you cut, about the logo's being a mix of fascist symbolism. Again, I literally never said "the Investec logo is a swastika", which is the point against which you are arguing.

As for curving the swastika, despite its idealised square version, that was a move that the Nazis brought to the table, meaning the logo could be stylised to suit their needs.

Finally, in countries where using swastikas are against the law (like in Lithuania until recently), fascists have gotten around it with swastika-like imagery that manage to suggest both a swastika and a Celtic cross at the same time. See, for example, the photo gallery here, which shows a pathetic little fascist meeting in Kaunas:

http://www.lrytas.lt/-11826071821182325 ... raukos.htm

I wouldn't exactly say I'm arguing, but you are refusing to wear a shirt because you say that it evokes Nazi symbolisim, whether it be a swastika or "swastika-like".

What I was trying to point out was that the swastika itself is not in of itself a Nazi symbol, nor does the use of it or something similar always evoke Nazism. Sure, if one paraded around with it emblazed on a military uniform or a red flag and white circle it's clear what the intention is. But the Investec logo is neither.

As for stylised versions, the basic swastika shape is still there. The "crosshairs" have not been extended, nor has the circular part been connected. That's very different from the Investec logo, which really doesn't feature the swastika shape at all.

You go on to cite the Lithuanian version. The Lithuanian flat does not contain a swastika. I agree that the flag is designed to evoke a Nazi flag, namely by having a black symbol on a white circle on a red background. But the cross used is not a swastika. Indeed, the cross used is not, by itself, a facist shape either.

Point of all this, which I think is a key point, and one that you are overlooking, is that these symbols pre-date Nazism. A cross, a cricle, a swastika. All pre-dating Nazism. It is the context in which they are used and by whom that changes their form and meaning. Do we think that the intention of Investec was to evoke Nazism, or to use a symbol that looks like a compass? If you refuse to wear a blue logo because of some remote and tenuous link to a swastika or swastika-like logo used by rag tag bands of neo-nazis then all you are doing is making the Nazi link to such shapes stronger, not taking a stand against facism. It's very much like the attitude to the British union flag in the eighties and nineties when it was very much associated with facist groups and the BNP. It has since been recalimed by widespread use by non-facist groups.

Well, I suppose that is unless you think that Investec have deliberately set out to invoke Nazism.

 

[Smoked Salmon]

I suppose the issue may be that the swastika is much more "obviously" a fascist symbol than the Celtic cross? I don't know, but they're both loathsome in my opinion.

Much like the swastika, the Celtic Cross predates any use by neo-nazi groups by millenia and is a historically Christian symbol. It is used in Scotland and Ireland widely today and I know a fair few people from those countries who would find your view of it as a "loathsome" actually rather offensive, since it is a symbol of their heritage.

Reclaim these symbols from Nazis, not reinforce their ownership claims.

 

[Benjoss]

Blimey!

Anyone want to talk about the Durex idea some more...?

 

[Smoked Salmon]

Blimey!

Anyone want to talk about the Durex idea some more...?

Condoms were invented by a German Jew for the British company that would become Durex (true fact) so they are about as anti-Nazi as you can get! I reckon that you're onto a winner mate.

 

[Éperons]

What I was trying to point out was that the swastika itself is not in of itself a Nazi symbol, nor does the use of it or something similar always evoke Nazism. Sure, if one paraded around with it emblazed on a military uniform or a red flag and white circle it's clear what the intention is. But the Investec logo is neither.

In my opinion, quasi-fascist imagery + football are not a good mix. If the Investec logo were on my credit card, I'd laugh at what a terrible logo it is (which it is for other reasons), and continue run up debt with it. But it's not. It's on a football shirt.

You go on to cite the Lithuanian version. The Lithuanian flat does not contain a swastika. I agree that the flag is designed to evoke a Nazi flag, namely by having a black symbol on a white circle on a red background. But the cross used is not a swastika. Indeed, the cross used is not, by itself, a facist shape either.

Of course. The reason they use that shape instead of a swastika is to circumvent the law. My point is merely that it doesn't have to be a 1:1 swastika (or 1:1 Celtic cross) to be evocative of fascism.

Point of all this, which I think is a key point, and one that you are overlooking, is that these symbols pre-date Nazism.

I obviously know this. But I can't quite call someone a slur for homosexual and then later claim that I merely thought he looked rather like a bundle of sticks, can I?

Coca-Cola used the swastika in their marketing before the Nazis. Countless religions have had swastika-like shapes in their symbology, and for obvious reasons: it's an easily deducable shape that has a certain appeal in its symmetry. But I'd argue that the symbol (and the Celtic cross with it) is now so closely aligned with fascism that their intentional, non-fascist use has to be done delicately.

You know, like using the word "yid".

Using a different homophobic slur by example: I can still say "we had a gay old time last night." And I might mean "happy and festive". But it's… naïve isn't the right word… thick-headedly stubborn is better… to then say, in 2012, "whoa whoa whoa… I did not mean 'homosexual'! I was using the old form of 'gay' that predates its association with homosexuality!"

It's exactly, in my opinion, the same case with swastikas, celtic crosses, etc.

you are doing is making the Nazi link to such shapes stronger, not taking a stand against facism.

I don't think I have any power in the world to make the Nazi link to swastikas stronger, considering that logo is now illegal in certain countries because of the perceived impermeability of the relationship.

But I also don't think one is "reclaiming" a symbol by using a similar one "casually". That is to say, I almost read you as suggesting that the Investec logo should be worn as an antifa move, in order to reclaim the symbol for I don't know exactly who… 1% banksters…

I ran into this recently personally. I designed a t-shirt in the fall that was precisely, specifically antifascist (though satirically). It was a big hit until people who consider themselves antifa read it as, perversely, fascist. I had to then specifically spell out how the shirt uses fascist language (not iconography) in order to show fascism's incoherence. That's a hard political move, and I'm not sure I succeeded. But that's what "reclaiming the swastika for non-fascists" would look like, not saying "you're crazy to think there's a fascist whiff about the Investec logo".

 

[VirginiaSpur]

I am utterly unconvinced that Investec are fascists.


I know that's not what you're saying, but still

It is a shame that the swastika was tainted by the Nazis, because it is a pretty cool looking symbol.

 

[Éperons]

I am utterly unconvinced that Investec are fascists.

Well, I suppose that is unless you think that Investec have deliberately set out to invoke Nazism.

This is orthogonal to the point I'm making. I don't give a shit what some dude/dudette with Corel Investec paid to draw up their logo had in mind. To them (and to the bankers), it probably looks like a crosshairs, evocative of how Investec manage, with pinpoint accuracy, to fuck over poor people while enriching themselves. I have no idea. I literally know nothing about the company, other than that they're based in the RSA and have paid Levy a horsecock's worth of money for their name to be on the shirt.

My point is that their logo is evocative of fascist symbolism, and it's simply too close to two iconic fascist symbols for me to want it on a football shirt, considering football support's own association with far-right politics (despite what the reality is).

Stone Island is another example. I'll never wear a Stone Island article of clothing because I'm poor. But also because the brand's logo, perhaps because it's similar to a Celtic cross, is associated with hooliganism.

If I was just some rich fella who spends his weekends at the opera, then my Stone Island jacket might be something I wear when I go out to the woods on a camping trip and listen to Rachmaninoff on my headphones. But since I'm a football fan, and since I am a vocal fan, Stone Island becomes off limits.

 

[Raitei]

I suppose being raised Hindu, I still associate the Swastika with Hinduism more closely than Nazi-ism. That being said, it is 'the other way round.' It's odd how relatively few years of infamous use can dominate millenniums worth of use before it.

 

[Smoked Salmon]

In my opinion, quasi-fascist imagery + football are not a good mix. If the Investec logo were on my credit card, I'd laugh at what a terrible logo it is (which it is for other reasons), and continue run up debt with it. But it's not. It's on a football shirt.

It isn't a facist image though, that's the point. You insisting it is doesn't make it so. If you ran a poll tomorrow you would be the only person voting that it's a "quasi-facist" image.

In order for it to be a "quasi-facist image" then surely enough people would have to associate such a shape with facism. That is clearly not the case with the Investec logo. You seem to be the only person who looks at it ans sees a facist symbol. If you are in a minoriyt of one, or very few, then has the logo built up enough of an association with facism tobe regarded as such.

I obviously know this. But I can't quite call someone a slur for homosexual and then later claim that I merely thought he looked rather like a bundle of sticks, can I?

Coca-Cola used the swastika in their marketing before the Nazis. Countless religions have had swastika-like shapes in their symbology, and for obvious reasons: it's an easily deducable shape that has a certain appeal in its symmetry. But I'd argue that the symbol (and the Celtic cross with it) is now so closely aligned with fascism that their intentional, non-fascist use has to be done delicately.

You know, like using the word "yid".

Using a different homophobic slur by example: I can still say "we had a gay old time last night." And I might mean "happy and festive". But it's… naïve isn't the right word… thick-headedly stubborn is better… to then say, in 2012, "whoa whoa whoa… I did not mean 'homosexual'! I was using the old form of 'gay' that predates its association with homosexuality!"

Well, firstly we are not talking about words but imagery, secondly in the bit of my post that you edited out I said that what builds the associated with facism is the use and context of a shape. There is no doubt that a swastika on a white background on a red flag or a military uniform is evoking of Nazism. But, I would not look at a religious depiction from Hindusim with it on and automatically think Nazism.

you are doing is making the Nazi link to such shapes stronger, not taking a stand against facism.

I don't think I have any power in the world to make the Nazi link to swastikas stronger, considering that logo is now illegal in certain countries because of the perceived impermeability of the relationship.

Of course you do, but I fear that you are being a tad disingenuous here because your objection is to a blue logo used by a bank, not a Nazi swastika bearing symbol flag banned by European countries. You were at pains to point out this distinction yourself a few posts back. If you are objecting to the Investec logo then you are taking a commercial symbol that is not recognised as being associated with facism and establishing, and therefore reinforcing, an association with facism groups. I would except the logic of your argument if there was a group of people who took the view that the Investec logo evoked facism. But so far only you have said this and I am not aware of any evidence of anyone other than yourself having this view, therefore it is surely you that is creating the association and purpetuating it by refusing to wear the shirt?

But I also don't think one is "reclaiming" a symbol by using a similar one "casually". That is to say, I almost read you as suggesting that the Investec logo should be worn as an antifa move, in order to reclaim the symbol for I don't know exactly who… 1% banksters…

No, I was simply referring collectively to symbols that pre-date Nazism that carry an association. Nothing more, nothing less. I am not saying that the Investec logo makes a statement against facism, rather that by refusing to wear it you are creating a link to it where one exists. If the swastika and Celtic cross are to be entirely rid of facist links then surely the last thing we need to do is to start finding shapes that are a bit similar and calling them Nazi symbols as well, therefore only putting the idea into the minds of others that such shapes are nothing be racist. Helll, we may as well phone up neo-Nazi groups and start suggesting shapes to them.

I ran into this recently personally. I designed a t-shirt in the fall that was precisely, specifically antifascist (though satirically). It was a big hit until people who consider themselves antifa read it as, perversely, fascist. I had to then specifically spell out how the shirt uses fascist language (not iconography) in order to show fascism's incoherence. That's a hard political move, and I'm not sure I succeeded. But that's what "reclaiming the swastika for non-fascists" would look like, not saying "you're crazy to think there's a fascist whiff about the Investec logo".

Can I be honest mate, do you know what this sounds like to me? It sounds like you were right in the first place and have probably had to accept their viewpoint as being right, despite your better judgment. Just because a number of these peopel banded together and said the logo you designed looked too facist, doesn't mean it actually was. I'm actually better it wasn't. ould you care to post it?

[ Image ]

In my view, the first two are not facist logos, but rather shapes claimed and abused by facist groups. Not ones over which they have ownership.

 

[Smoked Salmon]

I am utterly unconvinced that Investec are fascists.

Well, I suppose that is unless you think that Investec have deliberately set out to invoke Nazism.

This is orthogonal to the point I'm making. I don't give a shit what some dude/dudette with Corel Investec paid to draw up their logo had in mind. To them (and to the bankers), it probably looks like a crosshairs, evocative of how Investec manage, with pinpoint accuracy, to fuck over poor people while enriching themselves. I have no idea. I literally know nothing about the company, other than that they're based in the RSA and have paid Levy a horsecock's worth of money for their name to be on the shirt.

If I unpacked a block of blue cheese which had some mould that looked like a Hitler moustache would that block of cheese be evoking facism? You I refuse to eat it? Your paragraph suggests that the intent, context and creation of such imagery is all irrelevant, so by that logic the cheese is a Nazi that should be relegated to the rubbish bin instead of eaten. Sure, I'm probably being a bit facetious here, but is all those other factors I mention weren't relevant, what would be the difference?

 

[AberdeenYid]

Did we ever decide if Beko make shite tellies or not?

 

[Smoked Salmon]

Did we ever decide if Beko make shite tellies or not?

Tellies are square.

Nazi flags are square.


Facists dontchaknow.

 

[AberdeenYid]

Did we ever decide if Beko make shite tellies or not?

Tellies are square.

Nazi flags are square.

Facists dontchaknow.

My Nazi flag is rectangular, actually.

Oh, so is my tv.

Shit. I'm confused.

 

[Smoked Salmon]

Did we ever decide if Beko make shite tellies or not?

Tellies are square.

Nazi flags are square.

Facists dontchaknow.

My Nazi flag is rectangular, actually.

Oh, so is my tv.

Shit. I'm confused.

Hitler was widescreen.

 

[VirginiaSpur]

So... Beko is facist?

 

[Smoked Salmon]

So... Beko is facist?

Clearly. :hudd:

 

[bensonrecon]