Bay City Nazis: Inside or Outside of the House?

[XLFD]

We have probably all seen a story or two about the confederate flag, and the controversies it sometimes causes when it is displayed in some areas.  This symbol goes back 150 years and has different meanings to people.

Some see it as a symbol of individualism or rebellious spirit, of state rights trumping federal powers, and associate it with liberty.

Others see it as a sign of racism, of supporting the policies of the antebellum south, and associate it with white supremacists. 

Whereas, some groups and states have dissociated themselves with the confederate flag, others have retained it or glorified it further.  It is a symbol after all, with ambiguous meaning, and we do have the right of free speech in America.

In Bay City, Michigan, over on the other side of the state, there is a new controversy taking root, mostly fueled by the media and some other knee-jerk groups about some individual hanging what appears to be a flag in his front window, depicting the well known swastika in a circle of white planted amidst a red backdrop.  That story is on Mlive here.

This flag was a standard of the German Nazi Party, adopted by Adolph Hitler in 1920 and used throughout his political career which was ended by the Allies after World War 2 twenty-five years later.   It is easily recognizable by all who have watched any number of movies as being the symbol of the movie's bad guys.  Everyone has free speech rights, but should there be limitations when it comes to the display of this symbol of what was one of the most barbaric chapters of history?

Before we rush to answer that question, let us consider a few things.  The swastika itself has been stigmatized throughout the Western world since WW2, but it is a symbol that has religious meaning throughout history, and is still widely used in the East, particularly in India.  In Sanskrit, swastika means "to be good".  Many Indian products and modern art still use the positive aspect of the swastika, which has been traditionally a good luck symbol with religious and geometrical significance.

 

 

Even the American 45th Infantry Division, the Thunderbirds, used a swastika in its insignia (above) during World War One, and this was because of its large contingent of eastern Indian members.  Shortly after the rise of Hitler, they switched to show a more appropo thunderbird. 

 

In Mein Kampf, Hitler described the Nazis' new flag: "In red we see the social idea of the movement, in white the nationalistic idea, in the swastika the mission of the struggle for the victory of the Aryan man, and, by the same token, the victory of the idea of creative work, which as such always has been and always will be anti-Semitic."   Because of the Nazis' flag, the swastika soon became a symbol of hate, anti -Semitism, violence, death, and murder.  The swastika was tilted at a 45 degree angle, and faced clockwise in the flag. 

This is important to distinguish, as some cultures in the past had differentiated between the clockwise swastika and the counter-clockwise sauvastika. In these cultures the swastika symbolized health and life while the sauvastika took on a mystical meaning of bad-luck or misfortune.

Since the Nazis use of the swastika, some differentiate the two meanings of the swastika by varying its direction - trying to make the clockwise, Nazi version of the swastika mean hate and death while the counter-clockwise version hold the ancient meaning of the symbol, life and good-luck.  As you can see in the Bay City window, the German flag replica is facing the public in a counterclockwise manner, and is hence, a sauvastika.  Oddly enough, the private side would be seen as a swastika. 

 

So should we have the individual take this vile symbol down or further explain himself?  Hanging a swastika is a crime in some European countries that can land you in jail for up to eight years.

Or should we honor his right to free speech?  Furthermore, should we stigmatize a symbol like the swastika just because it was adopted by an evil dictator, or should we only stigmatize it when used in context with that person?

[Willy]

Here's how I look at Nazi dad's situation. First of all if you love your children you would do everything you can to protect them. Nazi dad apparently thinks his beliefs are more important than his kids. Believe what you want but when your children become involved you have to do what's right for them even if that means kissing the authorities collective as_es. It's hard to understand someone who holds ideals that are anti Constitutional but still wants to be protected by that same Constitution. On the other hand what gives the Government the right to take anyone's children away just because of their beliefs. If this were the common practice then all of the believers in radical Islam should be made childless by the State. I don't see any courts confiscating the children of Muslim extremists who we all know are in every part of this Country. The Government knows which Mosques preach radical Islamic doctrine and who attends those institutions. So why doesn't New Jersey make a clean sweep of their children? This is Governmental intrusion and hypocrisy in the extreme.

[XLFD]

Very good analysis Willy.  Tolerance needs to work both ways.  If CPS can take away someone's kid for just their beliefs, their affiliations or other things which does no direct damage to the kids, then you give the government an awful lot of power to split up families.  The right to raise your own kids should be an inalienable right only taken away due to gross negligence or abuse.  When government agencies use Gestapo tactics to take away someone's kids due to someone's beliefs, look for the day when your kid is taken away for being called Ronald Reagan Rotta, for example, or you hang one of these:

I think the uniform was used as a publicity stunt to increase awareness to his plight, and it did its job.  If he went to court in a three-piece suit, it wouldn't be news, and it would not illustrate the absurd by being absurd, it may have worked on certain judges, but probably not your typical NJ judge.  He smokes, the neck swastika tattoo is just weird, and he obviously is misguided in his neo-Nazi beliefs, but if his background is otherwise clean, give him access to his kids.

[AQUAMAN]

Well said again Willy, covers all the bases there.

[XLFD]

An update on this story has been printed by Mlive today, two roommates and the older one's girlfriend live at the house, it states:  "The Nazi and Confederate flags recently hung in the window of a house near Bay City’s Birney Park were there to warn away drug dealers and are not indicative of racist beliefs, says a man who lives at the house...

The older roommate says he suggested hanging the Nazi flag in reverse,  so the swastika emblem was inverted in an attempt to make it clear the two men are not espousing national-socialism, white supremacy or  anti-Semitism. The 42-year-old man who hung the flag is Native American, his roommate added." 

[AQUAMAN]

Hmmm, that gives a new twist to this whole story, if in fact, it's true. Bay City isn't exactly the best part of Michigan these days, so anything is possible, imho. Btw, I really like that snake picture above. Have a flag and cap with those conservative emblems too.

[Custerdeb]

My understanding is the Nazis inverted the swastica from it's original peaceful intent. The image - as the rebel flag - gives me the creeps. It's grounds for imprisonment in Germany.

[XLFD]

It's not uncommon for the bad guys to adopt a symbol of good for their own ends to try to prove they're not the bad guys.  Or to cover their true bad policies by labeling them opposite of what they do.   Such as the Affordable Care Act, or a peace offensive.  Welcome to the Ludington Torch Custerdeb.

[easymoney]

from everything I've been reading XLFD,it's the un-affordable care act

[Jane]

welcome newcomer