• @barsoap@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    2
    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]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      81 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
        21 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]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          31 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.

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

            They chose a symbol to dogwhistle to everyone that they’re Nazis.

            Yes.

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

            No. For the simple reason that there’s no sufficient personal or ideological continuation of “they”. Vast swathes of Nazis left in the process of Azov becoming a regular brigade of the National Guard because they didn’t want to be part of a government-controlled organisation out to de-nazify the thing, regular people joined. Also no further foreigners joined, those get sorted into the foreign legion, part of the army. National guard is run by the ministry of interior, not defence ministry.

            The powers that be in the ministry of interior decided not to replace the logo. I have no insight as to their reasoning.

            • xXthrowawayXx [none/use name]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              11 year ago

              Okay, two different theys, the most recent being the ukranian government, whose decision to keep the name and logo you just can’t fathom.

              Let me give a little insight into their reasoning: they want to keep the Nazi regiment.

              If you bought a Nazi bar that had to close down because of all the Nazis and you wanted to reopen it as a bar, but without all the Nazis, would you keep the old name and leave the logo the same?

              No, of course you wouldn’t. You’d change the name, clean house, completely renovate, change the menu, stop serving jagermiester and even take a strong anti fascist line.

              Since the ukranian government didn’t do that it’s obvious they want to keep running the Nazi bar on the dl.

              • @barsoap@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                21 year ago

                They wanted to keep the fighters who were willing to stay and not be Nazis. Changing the name is pointless it’s named after the Azov Sea, and cleaning house can be done without changing the emblem, especially as it was only a Wolfsangel and not a Swastika. Had it been a Swastika I’d be 110% on your side but it isn’t. As already said: Random people just don’t associate the Wolfsangel with Nazis, you pretty much need to be a Nazi or Antifa to recognise it.

                And since when is Jägermeister a Nazi drink. What’s next, Berentzen Saurer Apfel?

                • xXthrowawayXx [none/use name]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  21 year ago

                  Okay, hold on!

                  The original azov wolfsangel insignia was a Nazi dogwhistle (you agreed with this!), but a little churn and a change of management and the exact same name and insignia are somehow fine?

                  How does that work?

                  • @barsoap@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    21 year ago

                    By people not considering the name and symbol tarnished enough to change? By not considering the symbol more important than the actual lived political practice (or rather lack thereof) in the regiment?