 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Should the swastika be banned? |
| Yes |
|
66% |
[ 8 ] |
| No |
|
33% |
[ 4 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 12 |
|
| Author |
Message |
David 
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: Victorian proposal to ban the swastika – for or against? |  |
|
This might be an unpopular position, but I've been feeling a little uncomfortable about recent Victorian government moves to ban public display of the swastika.
I understand why they're doing it, and on a superficial level it seems like a no-brainer: why allow neo-nazis carte blanche to spread their iconography? But I think the more you drill down into this proposal, the worse it gets. This response from Liberty Victoria I think touches on some of the problems:
https://libertyvictoria.org.au/content/proposed-ban-swastika-victoria
| Quote: | Given the very serious consequences of being convicted of such an offence (including potential imprisonment and the shame of being found to support Nazi ideology), if it is to be enacted the offence should require that: (1) the intentional display of the Hakenkreuz as a symbol of hate must proven beyond reasonable doubt rather than on a standard of what a person ‘ought’ to have known’; and (2) only require potential defences to be raised on an evidentiary basis (and once raised it should be for the prosecution to disprove the defence beyond reasonable doubt).
It must be noted that, even in cases in which an accused has strong prospects of establishing a defence in court, the risk of police action and charges remain. Contrary to the objectives of the law this will most likely fall – even in error given the available defences – on members of the Hindu and other religious communities and on artists and satirists.
Such a risk should not be taken in circumstances where the proposed law is highly unlikely to reduce racial vilification in Victoria. The experience of far-right organisations shows the use of far-right icons (such as the swastika) can easily be adapted and modified to be highly suggestive of the prohibited icon but not violate prohibition (consider, for example the use of other Fascist and Norse icons by far-right groups). This offence also has an exception for tattoos, and does not appear to apply to online content (such as social media posts). These fairly straightforward avenues for evading the offence create perverse incentives to ‘game the system’.
Further, as demonstrated by far-right ‘meme’ culture online, such icons constantly evolve and often involve initially benign icons (such a ‘Pepe the Frog’ or even the ‘okay’ symbol) or religious iconography (such as of crusaders and saints). Simply put, prohibition is a blunt instrument that will not prevent signals and ‘dog-whistling’ being given to extremist groups. The long-standing prohibition of the swastika in Germany has done nothing to prevent the re-emergence of far-right extremism over recent times. These laws are likely to be tested by potential extremists who may seek to portray themselves as ‘martyrs’ committed to free expression, and prohibition and censorship might well have the perverse outcome of generating more attention towards such persons (and indeed the icons themselves) through lengthy litigation. |
One thing that isn't mentioned above is probably my biggest concern: that punishment will fall disproportionately on (particularly marginalised) young people, for many of whom the swastika is not a specific symbol of anti-semitism or white supremacy but more transgression/'edginess' for its own sake; are we going to see teenagers who graffiti footpaths or train carriages hauled before the courts and jailed? I think that's a much graver risk than devout Hindus having their religious icon misunderstood, personally.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
 |
stui magpie 
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I voted Yes, but.
My first instincts clash. I don't generally like banning things but I also see no reason to permit people to display a clear symbol of hate and anti semitism.
The article raises some good questions but I'm not across the legislation or proposed penalties.
If someone put the Swastika flag up on a flagpole in their front yard, I have no problem making them take it down and potentially a fine, but Jail time would be a stretch without priors I would have thought.
Provided there's some elements of discretion and, dare I say it, common sense allowed for in determining guilt and penalties it would be OK but that might be too much to wish for.
What was the trigger for the banning? Dan didn't just wake one morning with his authoritarian streak itchy and needing feeding, asking himself what he can ban today, surely? Although I wouldn't reject that scenario out of hand, there must have been a trigger?
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw 
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I think we probably need to educate our young people better - if they genuinely think a swastika is just a symbol of transgression or edginess, we have failed as a society to teach them any of the important lessons of the twentieth century.
Sticking up a swastika is a classic performative utterance. It's a form of hate speech. Anyone who can see and has basic reasoning capacity identifies it instantly as a symbolic representation of approval of the murder of millions of people for their "trasngression or edginess". Just transgress or be edgy some other way. Barrack for Carlton, if you have to, paint "666" on your foreheads, become deeply religious - but don't do this. |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I think that’s sensible enough, but I’m talking about people from low-education backgrounds whose knowledge of WW2 politics only extends as far (if that) as knowing the Nazis were the bad guys and that responsible, upstanding members of society condemn them – which of course is like catnip for rebellious youths, particularly those from poorer or even migrant backgrounds. There’s a long history of this kind of contrarian or transgressive adoption of Nazi paraphernalia – the English ‘70s punk scene is one case that comes to mind.
Whether such usage is in any way defensible or should be tolerated is beside the point, for me; the question is, will these laws punish actual white supremacists – who are, as the link above points out, quite adept at finding and disseminating alternative symbols that serve the same purpose – or only those who are dumb enough to not realise the full implications of this symbology?
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
Skids 
Quitting drinking will be one of the best choices you make in your life.
Joined: 11 Sep 2007
Location: Joined 3/6/02 . Member #175
|
| Post subject: | |
|
In the ancient Indian language of Sanskrit, swastika means "well-being". The symbol has been used by Hindus, Buddhists and Jains for millennia and is commonly assumed to be an Indian sign.
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-29644591
_________________
Don't count the days, make the days count. |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Pies4shaw wrote: | I think we probably need to educate our young people better - if they genuinely think a swastika is just a symbol of transgression or edginess, we have failed as a society to teach them any of the important lessons of the twentieth century.
Sticking up a swastika is a classic performative utterance. It's a form of hate speech. Anyone who can see and has basic reasoning capacity identifies it instantly as a symbolic representation of approval of the murder of millions of people for their "trasngression or edginess". Just transgress or be edgy some other way. Barrack for Carlton, if you have to, paint "666" on your foreheads, become deeply religious - but don't do this. |
this, thats all that matters, it caused, and causes so much pain to so many, even today,
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
If that was the trigger, I agree completely. Cracking a walnut with a sledgehammer. Typical really.
As I said earlier, I think banning it is appropriate but there needs to be room for context. Hindus or Jains or others should be free to use it in the context of their beliefs, but dimwits who want to fly a clearly Nazi flag in their yard should have their flag removed, flagpole cut down and fined. Peanuts who paint Swastikas on Synagogues should spend a week in remand and then do community service by removing their grafitti with a wire brush and acetone.
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Now this ban is about to go national, and I think Michael Bradley in Crikey nails why it's utterly pointless:
https://www.crikey.com.au/2023/11/30/nazi-salute-fascism-labor-peter-dutton/
| Quote: | If Germany had banned the Nazi salute in the 1920s, Hitler would still have come to power. It cannot be viably argued that banning it now will prevent a re-emergence of white supremacist, fascist ideology or politics
[...]
There is a case for criminalising Nazi symbols, as anti-Semitism has been re-emerging generally in recent years, and that case is stronger right now because of the extremely heightened atmosphere and threats caused by the dreadful conflict in Israel/Palestine.
However, I repeat what I’ve said before: It is only the baggage that history has attached to any word, gesture or symbol that renders it dangerous. The law, consequently, must be applied with extreme care, mindful of unintended consequences and ready to be moderated or withdrawn if and when the danger has passed.
The government needs to stop panicking and start breathing. |
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
Skids
Quitting drinking will be one of the best choices you make in your life.
Joined: 11 Sep 2007
Location: Joined 3/6/02 . Member #175
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I tell ya what. My rotation of the 3 Collingwood flags I have on my flagpole has triggered a fair few Wet toast fans in the neighborhood. 
I even had one clown across the road telling me it's not a real premiership coz we don't travel as much as them  I just gave him a little smile and, walking away said "no doubt about the authenticity of your spoon this year, spoon boy"
_________________
Don't count the days, make the days count. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
