• Kieselguhr [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    bollocks

    I see the cognitive dissonance is kicking in for you. Hopefully you will recover, and you’ll read western mainstream narratives more critically.

    How funny is this bit though?

    "The BBC had been among the first to warn of Azov, criticizing Kyiv in 2014 for ignoring a group that “sports three Nazi symbols on its insignia.” A 2018 report noted Azov’s “well-established links to the far right.”

    Shortly after Putin’s invasion, though, the BBC began to assert that although “to Russia, they are neo-Nazis and their origins lie in a neo-Nazi group,” the Azov Regiment was being “falsely portrayed as Nazi” by Moscow."

    They suddenly became not-nazis in February 2022? But they kept the wolfsangel? Was BBC spouting Russian misinfo in 2014? Or was it a Russian time travelling double agent who wrote all those articles for prominent western papers about the concerning rise of neonazis in Ukraine? If they are so fringe, why are they giving them so much airtime?

    • barsoap@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Azov has been getting denazified ever since it became an official battalion. A huge number of Nazis left, regular people joined, are there still Nazis left? Probably, yes, but they’re not running around with SS runes on their helmets that shit doesn’t fly.

      As far as the Wolfangel is concerned: It’s not a clear Nazi symbol. Tons of German tows have it on their coat of arms.

      • xXthrowawayXx [none/use name]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Stop trying to rehabilitate the wolfsangel. If your town had it for three centuries then maybe that’s not nazi symbolism. If you join a nationalist right wing regiment and get it tattooed on yourself, that’s Nazi symbolism.

        Think about it like the swastika. If someone is choosing it now, in Europe, in a right wing military organization, they’re nazis, not fans of Indian symbols and culture. Do you know how I can tell?

        • barsoap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Think about it like the swastika.

          No. Then we can also throw away pretty much all of Germanic culture as the Nazis appropriated all of it. It would mean we’d let them win after the fact.

          It’s more like the number 88: Sure, might be a Nazi, might also be a guy born in 88. People not knowledgeable about Nazi symbolism don’t actually recognise it as Nazi symbolism which is a gigantic difference to the Swastika. But that’s about the Wolfsangel in general.

          Regarding Azov, should the logo have been changed? On balance, I say it would’ve been a good idea, especially since it’s 1:1 the Svoboda Wolfsangel.

          • xXthrowawayXx [none/use name]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            oh no, not germanic cultutre appropriated by the nazis and wideley seen as dogwhistles! how will the world move on?

            your’e absolutely right that the wolfsangel is like the number 88. maybe someone with it in a username or email was born or married that year. but when they’re joining a nationalist right wing militia the number 88 means they’re a nazi

            we’re not talking about random people on the street with tee shirts that have wolfsangels on em (btw they’d be nazis too). we’re talking about people joining a famously right wing, nationalist militia in a country with a long history of nazism. they didn’t pick those symbols out because they just love interesting history!

            when people choose symbols associated with nazis now they’re nazis. i’m sorry, that’s just reality.

            • barsoap@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              No, we’re not talking about that. You are. All I said about the Wolfsangel is that it’s not an unambigiously nazi symbol, which you just agreed to, the rest is you foaming at the mouth.

              Yes, Azov at the beginning was a Nazi org, otherwise it would hardly had to have get denazified when getting rolled into official state structures, now would it. What’s your fucking problem.

              • xXthrowawayXx [none/use name]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                My problem is that we’re not talking about this in a vacuum. We aren’t having a nice little hypothetical conversation about weather or not you can judge the town of burgweldel for having a wolfsangel on their town coat of arms.

                We are talking about people joining a right wing nationalist militia using the wolfsangel. In the context of this conversation it is unambiguously a Nazi dogwhistle and indefensible, unless you want to defend Nazis. Do you want to defend Nazis?

                • barsoap@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  We are talking about people joining a right wing nationalist militia using the wolfsangel. In the context of this conversation it is unambiguously a Nazi dogwhistle and indefensible, unless you want to defend Nazis.

                  Again: Azovs at the beginning was a Nazi org. I never did say anything to the contrary. Yes they absolutely chose it because of its implications.

                  On the other side of the equation we have plenty of army insignia all over Europe using the Wolfsangel, both historically (pre-Nazi) and contemporarily – it’s a hunting weapon, after all, you shouldn’t be more surprised to see it on military insignia than a sword or bow and arrow.

                  Should Azov have changed their logo? I do think so. But at the same time it’s not valid to say “Because they still use the same symbol they’re still Nazis”.

                  • xXthrowawayXx [none/use name]@hexbear.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Those other regiments aren’t on the other side of the equation because there is no equation. We’re not talking about the whole of semiotics throughout the history of europe, we’re talking about a specific nationalist right wing militia that uses Nazi symbols and ideas.

                    They chose a symbol to dogwhistle to everyone that they’re Nazis. Now they say they’re not Nazis but they kept the symbol that they chose to low key tell everyone me they’re Nazis.

                    Do you know what that means? it means they’re still nazis

                    This isn’t hard to understand. Theres no nuance here. They use the nazi markings knowing they’re nazi markings. They’re Nazis.