![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 |
Should Wikipedia say that the Nazi symbol was the swastika, or that it was a variant of the swastika, for instance hakenkreuz or "hooked cross"?
Affected articles include Swastika, Nazi symbolism, Flag of Nazi Germany, Mein Kampf, Strafgesetzbuch section 86a, Nazi punk, etc. Binksternet ( talk) 21:08, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
Regarding Hitler, the literature is clear that he adopted the pre-Christian swastika which was already in use by German Aryanists to stand for notional "Aryan" racial purity. To serve as the symbol of Nazism, Hitler imbued the swastika with pro-Christian, anti-Jewish and anti-Marxist characteristics, to fit his political aims. He represented the symbol as having a Christian origin, but it was demonstrably in use many centuries before Christ. All of this is treated in Malcolm Quinn's 1994 The Swastika: Constructing the Symbol.
Regarding the difference between the English and German languages, the English loan word swastika is by far the most common term for the symbol in the English-speaking world. The German word for the same symbol is hakenkreuz, which translates literally to "hooked cross". Literal translations are interesting for the reader but not definitive. The definitive semantic translation in the English language has always been swastika.
For many years, under the careful attention of the late User:Paul Barlow and other topic experts, this article has supplied the German word hakenkreuz in two or three places, as an entry in lists along with French and other language translations, or when a specific German law is mentioned. This is the proper way to represent the German term, as a part of the global picture. The wrong way to represent the German term is to prop it up prominently as the primary English term for the Nazi symbol. Recent edits have attempted to do just that.
Activists and others have also come to this article many times to try and separate the positive aspects of the swastika from the poison of Nazism, a form of trying to Right Great Wrongs. These editors often use the tactic of changing "swastika" to "hakenkreuz" as if the two words meant two different symbols. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] These efforts have been reverted in every case. Very often, the activist editors have a history of editing in Hindu topics, for instance Toshi2k2 who was blocked for WP:NOTHERE. They have been trying to use Wikipedia as a tool to establish two different symbols, so that the ancient swastika is no longer saddled with Nazi toxicity. But this is wishful thinking! Steven Heller describes this problem in depth in his book, The Swastika: Symbol Beyond Redemption?, writing about how the swastika in Western usage has become a symbol of the rejection of civil order, or it is employed simply to shock the observer. The Nazi connection persists in the swastika today.
Let's not try to rewrite history and ignore the damage from Hitler. Rather, let's tell the reader about all of these aspects, but in proper balance. The Nazi symbol has always been a swastika. Binksternet ( talk) 21:08, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
lengthy and uselessto you because your claims like Hakenkreuz being a loanword or Hakenkreuz not translated as "hooked cross" is erroneous, to begin with, and runs contrary to what the sources say. WikiLinuz ( talk) 00:25, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
Not sure, I fully understand the question. GoodDay ( talk) 03:37, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
@ Binksternet: The way you phrased that proposal sounds strange. The RfC is rather regarding "mention of Hakenkreuz at the article text, and subsequently in the lead in adherence with WP:LEAD". No one is suggesting total replacement of swastika with its "variant"; it's about a mention. Please rephrase your proposal as such; because, your proposal doesn't seem to reflect the discussion. WikiLinuz ( talk) 02:14, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
What was the article's status quo? -- GoodDay ( talk) 05:14, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
The RfC is regarding mentioning an instance of "Hakenkreuz"—the original term used by the Nazi Party—in the article body, and subsequently a single mention in the lead section in adherence with
WP:MOSLEAD.
The current revisions of
Swastika &
Swastika#Nazi_symbol and
Nazi symbolism &
Nazi_symbolism#Swastika does exactly that: a single mention in lead, and a single mention in the article body.
The RfC is NOT regarding replacing every instance of swastika with Hakenkreuz i.e. it's NOT about "find-and-replace" of swastika with Hakenkreuz, rather about a single mention of Hakenkreuz.
It's preferable if editors could "support" or "oppose" this decision regarding mentioning Hakenkreuz. Please have a look at the previous discussion concerning Hakenkreuz. WikiLinuz ( talk) 02:14, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
Trying to clarify this for myself and others – the debate seems to be not so much about whether the Nazi symbol was a swastika or a variant of a swastika (as the RfC question currently states), but about whether it should be primarily referred to as a "swastika" or a "Hakenkreuz". So this version of the article is the status quo, and this is WikiLinuz's preferred version (see specifically the second paragraph of the lead, and the first paragraph of the "Use in Nazism" section). And the consensus here will affect similar changes at related articles. Binksternet, is this a correct statement of the situation? If so, I'd recommend altering the RfC question, to something along the lines of "Should Wikipedia primarily refer to the Nazi symbol as a 'swastika' or a 'Hakenkreuz'?", with maybe those two diffs as examples. Dan from A.P. ( talk) 12:52, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
FWIW I do think that the RfC is not quite
neutral nor sufficiently clear about the dispute at issue, and would prefer:
The Nazis called the symbol on their flag a "Hakenkreutz". Does this word mean:
A. Swastika
B. A particular Nazi-specific variant of the swastika
C. Something else?
Loki (
talk)
18:34, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
of course it[the Nazi appropriation]
is highly significant and unquestionably should feature prominently in the lead.did you not understand? And where did you find
it is not really remotely accurate to say that the Nazis landed on the symbol by "pure coincidence"in anything I wrote? And where did I give you the idea that I might
want to argue that any mention of that topic altogether should be ommitted from the lead? I wrote a very short paragraph, it might have been better had you read what I did say and not written a wall of text 'responding' to what I did not say. Had you done so, we might be further forward. But in all honesty, I don't see that further debate would be fruitful: this is an RFC and I have stated my opinion below. -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 17:16, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
In the Western world, it was a symbol of auspiciousness and good luck until the 1930s[4] when the German Nazi Party adopted a right-facing form and used it as an emblem of the Aryan race.
The party gets a mention in the florid prose above, the second sentence, but if a tattooist refuses then just quote the first one. ~ cygnis insignis 18:13, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
Everyone must learn that truth. Sonubondre ( talk) 10:08, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
In the earlier version "gammadian" was mentioned 6 times. The version by User:Peyushgoel, whose only edits so far have been to this article, mentioned it 140 times. The article itself makes it clear that "By the 19th century, the term swastika was adopted into the English lexicon, replacing gammadion from Greek γαμμάδιον." This is the English language encyclopedia, thus we should use the common English word. Doug Weller talk 09:10, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Swastika has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
change the line "In the Western world, it was a symbol of auspiciousness and good luck until the 1930s[4] when the German Nazi Party adopted a right-facing form and used it as an emblem of the Aryan race" to "In the Western world, it was a symbol of auspiciousness and good luck until the 1930s[4] when the German Nazi Party adopted a hooked cross which is a christian symbol which looks like the "Swastika" and used it as an emblem of the Aryan race" 2405:201:401C:B0BB:B911:1F70:48D:53FA ( talk) 15:18, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Swastika has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
This symbol is at the core of Hinduism and Hitler had no connection to Hinduism nor did he ever mentioned this in any of his writing. The symbol is a rotated cross where as SWASTIKA is not rotated. He has never mentioned the word SWASTIKA in his lifetime of speeches or writing. Hence the symbol should be presented as Hakenkreuz strictly in German terms and not be interpreted as SWASTIKA to avoid confusion and incosistencies. 220.240.96.17 ( talk) 12:06, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
The symbol used by Hitler and the Nazi party was the Hakenkreuz, or the hooked cross, which has no relation with the Hindu symbol Swastika. The difference between both is, the Hakenkreuz is at an angle of 45° clockwise with the ground, and is a Christian symbol, has nothing to do with Hinduism or the Swastika. The whole confusion is created by the wrong translation, improper research and it's wrong usage by the media. Anonymous User 9567 ( talk) 05:21, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
I do not like the use of the word Svastika outside India. It is a word of Indian origin, and has its history and definite meaning in India. I know the temptation is great to transfer names, with which we are familiar, to similar objects which come before us in the course of our researches. But it is a temptation which the true student ought to resist, except, it may be, for the sake of illustration. The mischief arising from the promiscuous use of technical terms is very great.” …the occurrence of such crosses in different parts of the world may or may not point to a common origin. But, if they are once called [Swastika], the vulgus profanum [common masses] will at one jump to the conclusion that they all come from India, and it will take some time to weed out such a prejudice. – Philologist Max Mueller, 1880, writing in a letter warning German archaeologist Heinrich Schliemann not to associate the Swastika with the latter’s findings of an ancient symbol at Troy.
♥ Th78blue ( talk)♥ 20:32, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
Hitler Called it "Hakenkreuz" — Hitler could have called the symbol a "swastika" or "swastica," which was what many people in Germany called the symbol at that time, but he instead made the deliberate choice to use the word "Hakenkreuz." He was aware of its history as an Eastern symbol, as he himself described the symbol when introducing the Hakenkreuz flag in 1920. Hitler's choice is perhaps an example of how German nationalism was reflected in the German language of that era. "Swastika" is clearly a Sanskrit word from India, while "Hakenkreuz" is clearly a German term that emphasizes that the symbol was not foreign but Germany's own. Considering the goals for the nation that Hitler described in Mein Kampf, the symbol needed to be called "Hakenkreuz." It was a "new" symbol, with an Aryan German word to describe it for what was supposed to be a new glory-era revival for Germany—the Third Reich. Yet through its clear visual similarity to the Eastern swastika, it simultaneously provided a connection to an ancient world history myth in which Germans, through the racially predetermined "Aryan" birthright, could rule over and slaughter others at will. As a variation of a cross, the symbol also implied a link to a divine mandate to do the same. As a cross, it could be neatly swapped in for the crucifix at German Christian churches to further Hitler's cult of the state, bridging his cult with the already existing churches. When German people hear the word "Hakenkreuz", they could immediately understand the symbol as a kind of cross, because the word is built into the term. Most English-speaking people on the other hand, when they hear the word "swastika," do not associate the symbol with a cross at all because the word used to describe it has nothing to do with a cross. Hitler always used the term "Hakenkreuz," which literally translates to "Hook-Cross," to refer to his symbol. The word "Hakenkreuz" was a German word used to refer to the swastika shape as a heraldic symbol according to the 1877 edition of the comprehensive German dictionary Deutsches Worterbuch. The word "swastika" or any similar variants do not appear in this dictionary, because it was not commonly known in at that time. It did not become well known until after Schliemann's excavations of Troy in the late 1870s and Muller's language theory later popularized it... [then here is where the other quote was that I already presented, but that can be found in primary material too] Muller clearly makes a distinction between two versions of the symbol assigning them two different words, "svastika (swastika) and "sauvastika," though in Sanskrit there is actually only the word "svastika." The symbol is also described as Hakenkreuz in the 'Secret of the Runes', an influential occultist book published in 1908 by the Austrian mystic Guido von List. The book lists the symbol in an illustrated compilation of ancient German heraldic symbols. However, by the time Hitler was a young man in the early 1900s, the word "swastika" was often used as a borrowed word in the German language to refer to the Eastern symbol, which was by then quite popular in Europe as a lucky symbol. It is therefore reasonable to assume Hitler was aware of the word's existence, yet he deliberately chose the other term, Hakenkreuz, to refer to his version of the symbol, which he infused with new meanings.
♥ Th78blue ( talk)♥ 21:11, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
Hello all,
Per the Bold, Revert, Discuss policy, we are now in the Discuss phase! I recently attempted to make a number of meaningful edits to this page to reflect a more global perspective, as opposed to a purely western perspective. The edits that I made were reverted by @ John Maynard Friedman: on the basis of their being such a "major change" that I should first discuss them on the talk page.
In essence, my edits are based around a wide diversity of opinion from a number of RS that reflect the more recent academic (and more commonly conventional) opinion that the swastika is in fact a distinct symbol from that of the hakenkreuz, and that a NPOV encyclopedic article should reflect this fact as such. Here are my sources for this:
Among others many other sources, but these were some of the latest, most authoritative and paint some of the picture that I was attempting to neutrally outline as best I could with the usage of hakenkreuz (hooked cross) and as separate and distinct, as the Hindu, Jain, Buddhist, communities, as well as the continent of Asia and so called "Eastern world" understand the distinction. For example, one point that I made that was cited from various secondary sources both (so this is by no means original research), was that the swastika and the hakenkreuz are already well established different words, as well as symbols, in Japan and the East broadly. The word for swastika is manji in Japanese, whereas the word for hakenkreuz, is hakenkroitsu. Furthermore, Hindu, Buddhist, and Jain communities consider it incorrect and downright offensive that much of the Western world sometimes (but increasingly less so) fails to make such a distinction. My edits do not take preference for one "world view" or another, but pointed out where the word is used in one manner and which, and where the other word predominates. Ultimately, there is no "righting of great wrongs" here, but a "righting of encyclopedic error" or perhaps an encyclopedic delay in translating the current academic and journalistic consensus (see above) to the wikipedia article on this topic.
In the interest of full disclosure, I will also be working on a draft article called Draft:Hakenkreuz (Hooked Cross) at the same time that I changed some sections of this article to reflect these facts consistently across all relevant pages of the encyclopedia.
Thank you, and looking forward to any feedback on this matter. Since a great deal of work went into building these edits out, I would appreciate if we decide to revert the last revert if a consensus is reached to move forward representing the facts as I presented them. However, as always in the interest of harmony, I will not be making any further edits on this page and topic until such consensus has been reached. ♥ Th78blue ( talk)♥ 20:21, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
the more recent academic...opinion that the swastika is in fact a distinct symbol from that of the hakenkreuzplease. Tewdar 20:27, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
The swastika...But the hakenkreuz...quote gives me the impression that these terms are being used as synonyms, rather than distinct. Tewdar 20:55, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
Bibliography
♥ Th78blue ( talk)♥ 12:17, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
♥ Th78blue ( talk)♥ 00:58, 8 February 2022 (UTC)My comment suggesting maintaining or “branding” the swastika as negative in the U.S. and Europe touched many raw nerves. A few months after the Zoom panel, the editor(s) of Macro Viewpoints, an online publication, wrote: “Hmmm! So now the Svastik is a symbol of ‘white superiority’? That’s a new one for us!” It is true that many Westerners associate the word swastika with past and present graphic expressions of racist white supremacy. Nonetheless, if those billions who revere the swastika insist that the Nazi hakenkreuz is not their symbol, then their belief must be respected.
While recognising Th78blue's good faith in raising this issue, there is a risk of falling into the trap of wp:righting great wrongs. Wikipedia follows common use in English-language media and the German word has not yet gained acceptance. The lead as currently written seems to me to reflect fairly the differing perspectives. But I can see a case for an additional section at the end of the article that describes contemporary efforts to reappraise and reframe this 20th century usage in a more world-wide perspective. It seems me that this would be a more productive way forward than trying to change the existing text significantly. -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 12:56, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
It is spreading bad image of Hinduism and as it also shows that Christianity is inferior than Hinduism.. 2402:3A80:165A:3D6B:0:1C:A4DF:2801 ( talk) 07:57, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Swastika has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Hi Team, This page requires editing because it is portraying our holy swastika symbol as Nazi Hakenkreuz symbol which are totally different. Our community is getting hatred due to this misrepresentation of symbol. In our religion swastika is a symbol of peace and prosperity.
Request you to please remove Nazi references from this. Dhirajadvani081991 ( talk) 20:29, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Swastika has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Swastika and Hakenkreuz (hooked cross) are two different symbol.Hakenkreuz (hooked cross) symbol used by the Nazi Party in Germany, and later by the Third Reich. Adolf Hitler chose it as the symbol of the German Workers Party after he joined where Swastika is a totally different than Hakenkreuz (hooked cross). It is belong to hindu, buddiest and jain religion. It is used as a symbol of divinity and spirituality in Indian religions, including Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism. 103.133.123.160 ( talk) 06:19, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
I have strong opposition on the line. The swastika symbol, 卐 or 卍, today primarily recognized in the West for its use by the Nazi party,[1] is an ancient religious icon in various Eurasian cultures. What Nazi party used was Hooked Cross and not Swastika. Swastika is one of the holy symbol of Hinduism and it represent Sun. I think this page should be update with this information. Following are some references supporting this data. [1] 192.55.18.36 ( talk) 10:42, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 |
Should Wikipedia say that the Nazi symbol was the swastika, or that it was a variant of the swastika, for instance hakenkreuz or "hooked cross"?
Affected articles include Swastika, Nazi symbolism, Flag of Nazi Germany, Mein Kampf, Strafgesetzbuch section 86a, Nazi punk, etc. Binksternet ( talk) 21:08, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
Regarding Hitler, the literature is clear that he adopted the pre-Christian swastika which was already in use by German Aryanists to stand for notional "Aryan" racial purity. To serve as the symbol of Nazism, Hitler imbued the swastika with pro-Christian, anti-Jewish and anti-Marxist characteristics, to fit his political aims. He represented the symbol as having a Christian origin, but it was demonstrably in use many centuries before Christ. All of this is treated in Malcolm Quinn's 1994 The Swastika: Constructing the Symbol.
Regarding the difference between the English and German languages, the English loan word swastika is by far the most common term for the symbol in the English-speaking world. The German word for the same symbol is hakenkreuz, which translates literally to "hooked cross". Literal translations are interesting for the reader but not definitive. The definitive semantic translation in the English language has always been swastika.
For many years, under the careful attention of the late User:Paul Barlow and other topic experts, this article has supplied the German word hakenkreuz in two or three places, as an entry in lists along with French and other language translations, or when a specific German law is mentioned. This is the proper way to represent the German term, as a part of the global picture. The wrong way to represent the German term is to prop it up prominently as the primary English term for the Nazi symbol. Recent edits have attempted to do just that.
Activists and others have also come to this article many times to try and separate the positive aspects of the swastika from the poison of Nazism, a form of trying to Right Great Wrongs. These editors often use the tactic of changing "swastika" to "hakenkreuz" as if the two words meant two different symbols. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] These efforts have been reverted in every case. Very often, the activist editors have a history of editing in Hindu topics, for instance Toshi2k2 who was blocked for WP:NOTHERE. They have been trying to use Wikipedia as a tool to establish two different symbols, so that the ancient swastika is no longer saddled with Nazi toxicity. But this is wishful thinking! Steven Heller describes this problem in depth in his book, The Swastika: Symbol Beyond Redemption?, writing about how the swastika in Western usage has become a symbol of the rejection of civil order, or it is employed simply to shock the observer. The Nazi connection persists in the swastika today.
Let's not try to rewrite history and ignore the damage from Hitler. Rather, let's tell the reader about all of these aspects, but in proper balance. The Nazi symbol has always been a swastika. Binksternet ( talk) 21:08, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
lengthy and uselessto you because your claims like Hakenkreuz being a loanword or Hakenkreuz not translated as "hooked cross" is erroneous, to begin with, and runs contrary to what the sources say. WikiLinuz ( talk) 00:25, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
Not sure, I fully understand the question. GoodDay ( talk) 03:37, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
@ Binksternet: The way you phrased that proposal sounds strange. The RfC is rather regarding "mention of Hakenkreuz at the article text, and subsequently in the lead in adherence with WP:LEAD". No one is suggesting total replacement of swastika with its "variant"; it's about a mention. Please rephrase your proposal as such; because, your proposal doesn't seem to reflect the discussion. WikiLinuz ( talk) 02:14, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
What was the article's status quo? -- GoodDay ( talk) 05:14, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
The RfC is regarding mentioning an instance of "Hakenkreuz"—the original term used by the Nazi Party—in the article body, and subsequently a single mention in the lead section in adherence with
WP:MOSLEAD.
The current revisions of
Swastika &
Swastika#Nazi_symbol and
Nazi symbolism &
Nazi_symbolism#Swastika does exactly that: a single mention in lead, and a single mention in the article body.
The RfC is NOT regarding replacing every instance of swastika with Hakenkreuz i.e. it's NOT about "find-and-replace" of swastika with Hakenkreuz, rather about a single mention of Hakenkreuz.
It's preferable if editors could "support" or "oppose" this decision regarding mentioning Hakenkreuz. Please have a look at the previous discussion concerning Hakenkreuz. WikiLinuz ( talk) 02:14, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
Trying to clarify this for myself and others – the debate seems to be not so much about whether the Nazi symbol was a swastika or a variant of a swastika (as the RfC question currently states), but about whether it should be primarily referred to as a "swastika" or a "Hakenkreuz". So this version of the article is the status quo, and this is WikiLinuz's preferred version (see specifically the second paragraph of the lead, and the first paragraph of the "Use in Nazism" section). And the consensus here will affect similar changes at related articles. Binksternet, is this a correct statement of the situation? If so, I'd recommend altering the RfC question, to something along the lines of "Should Wikipedia primarily refer to the Nazi symbol as a 'swastika' or a 'Hakenkreuz'?", with maybe those two diffs as examples. Dan from A.P. ( talk) 12:52, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
FWIW I do think that the RfC is not quite
neutral nor sufficiently clear about the dispute at issue, and would prefer:
The Nazis called the symbol on their flag a "Hakenkreutz". Does this word mean:
A. Swastika
B. A particular Nazi-specific variant of the swastika
C. Something else?
Loki (
talk)
18:34, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
of course it[the Nazi appropriation]
is highly significant and unquestionably should feature prominently in the lead.did you not understand? And where did you find
it is not really remotely accurate to say that the Nazis landed on the symbol by "pure coincidence"in anything I wrote? And where did I give you the idea that I might
want to argue that any mention of that topic altogether should be ommitted from the lead? I wrote a very short paragraph, it might have been better had you read what I did say and not written a wall of text 'responding' to what I did not say. Had you done so, we might be further forward. But in all honesty, I don't see that further debate would be fruitful: this is an RFC and I have stated my opinion below. -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 17:16, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
In the Western world, it was a symbol of auspiciousness and good luck until the 1930s[4] when the German Nazi Party adopted a right-facing form and used it as an emblem of the Aryan race.
The party gets a mention in the florid prose above, the second sentence, but if a tattooist refuses then just quote the first one. ~ cygnis insignis 18:13, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
Everyone must learn that truth. Sonubondre ( talk) 10:08, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
In the earlier version "gammadian" was mentioned 6 times. The version by User:Peyushgoel, whose only edits so far have been to this article, mentioned it 140 times. The article itself makes it clear that "By the 19th century, the term swastika was adopted into the English lexicon, replacing gammadion from Greek γαμμάδιον." This is the English language encyclopedia, thus we should use the common English word. Doug Weller talk 09:10, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Swastika has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
change the line "In the Western world, it was a symbol of auspiciousness and good luck until the 1930s[4] when the German Nazi Party adopted a right-facing form and used it as an emblem of the Aryan race" to "In the Western world, it was a symbol of auspiciousness and good luck until the 1930s[4] when the German Nazi Party adopted a hooked cross which is a christian symbol which looks like the "Swastika" and used it as an emblem of the Aryan race" 2405:201:401C:B0BB:B911:1F70:48D:53FA ( talk) 15:18, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Swastika has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
This symbol is at the core of Hinduism and Hitler had no connection to Hinduism nor did he ever mentioned this in any of his writing. The symbol is a rotated cross where as SWASTIKA is not rotated. He has never mentioned the word SWASTIKA in his lifetime of speeches or writing. Hence the symbol should be presented as Hakenkreuz strictly in German terms and not be interpreted as SWASTIKA to avoid confusion and incosistencies. 220.240.96.17 ( talk) 12:06, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
The symbol used by Hitler and the Nazi party was the Hakenkreuz, or the hooked cross, which has no relation with the Hindu symbol Swastika. The difference between both is, the Hakenkreuz is at an angle of 45° clockwise with the ground, and is a Christian symbol, has nothing to do with Hinduism or the Swastika. The whole confusion is created by the wrong translation, improper research and it's wrong usage by the media. Anonymous User 9567 ( talk) 05:21, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
I do not like the use of the word Svastika outside India. It is a word of Indian origin, and has its history and definite meaning in India. I know the temptation is great to transfer names, with which we are familiar, to similar objects which come before us in the course of our researches. But it is a temptation which the true student ought to resist, except, it may be, for the sake of illustration. The mischief arising from the promiscuous use of technical terms is very great.” …the occurrence of such crosses in different parts of the world may or may not point to a common origin. But, if they are once called [Swastika], the vulgus profanum [common masses] will at one jump to the conclusion that they all come from India, and it will take some time to weed out such a prejudice. – Philologist Max Mueller, 1880, writing in a letter warning German archaeologist Heinrich Schliemann not to associate the Swastika with the latter’s findings of an ancient symbol at Troy.
♥ Th78blue ( talk)♥ 20:32, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
Hitler Called it "Hakenkreuz" — Hitler could have called the symbol a "swastika" or "swastica," which was what many people in Germany called the symbol at that time, but he instead made the deliberate choice to use the word "Hakenkreuz." He was aware of its history as an Eastern symbol, as he himself described the symbol when introducing the Hakenkreuz flag in 1920. Hitler's choice is perhaps an example of how German nationalism was reflected in the German language of that era. "Swastika" is clearly a Sanskrit word from India, while "Hakenkreuz" is clearly a German term that emphasizes that the symbol was not foreign but Germany's own. Considering the goals for the nation that Hitler described in Mein Kampf, the symbol needed to be called "Hakenkreuz." It was a "new" symbol, with an Aryan German word to describe it for what was supposed to be a new glory-era revival for Germany—the Third Reich. Yet through its clear visual similarity to the Eastern swastika, it simultaneously provided a connection to an ancient world history myth in which Germans, through the racially predetermined "Aryan" birthright, could rule over and slaughter others at will. As a variation of a cross, the symbol also implied a link to a divine mandate to do the same. As a cross, it could be neatly swapped in for the crucifix at German Christian churches to further Hitler's cult of the state, bridging his cult with the already existing churches. When German people hear the word "Hakenkreuz", they could immediately understand the symbol as a kind of cross, because the word is built into the term. Most English-speaking people on the other hand, when they hear the word "swastika," do not associate the symbol with a cross at all because the word used to describe it has nothing to do with a cross. Hitler always used the term "Hakenkreuz," which literally translates to "Hook-Cross," to refer to his symbol. The word "Hakenkreuz" was a German word used to refer to the swastika shape as a heraldic symbol according to the 1877 edition of the comprehensive German dictionary Deutsches Worterbuch. The word "swastika" or any similar variants do not appear in this dictionary, because it was not commonly known in at that time. It did not become well known until after Schliemann's excavations of Troy in the late 1870s and Muller's language theory later popularized it... [then here is where the other quote was that I already presented, but that can be found in primary material too] Muller clearly makes a distinction between two versions of the symbol assigning them two different words, "svastika (swastika) and "sauvastika," though in Sanskrit there is actually only the word "svastika." The symbol is also described as Hakenkreuz in the 'Secret of the Runes', an influential occultist book published in 1908 by the Austrian mystic Guido von List. The book lists the symbol in an illustrated compilation of ancient German heraldic symbols. However, by the time Hitler was a young man in the early 1900s, the word "swastika" was often used as a borrowed word in the German language to refer to the Eastern symbol, which was by then quite popular in Europe as a lucky symbol. It is therefore reasonable to assume Hitler was aware of the word's existence, yet he deliberately chose the other term, Hakenkreuz, to refer to his version of the symbol, which he infused with new meanings.
♥ Th78blue ( talk)♥ 21:11, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
Hello all,
Per the Bold, Revert, Discuss policy, we are now in the Discuss phase! I recently attempted to make a number of meaningful edits to this page to reflect a more global perspective, as opposed to a purely western perspective. The edits that I made were reverted by @ John Maynard Friedman: on the basis of their being such a "major change" that I should first discuss them on the talk page.
In essence, my edits are based around a wide diversity of opinion from a number of RS that reflect the more recent academic (and more commonly conventional) opinion that the swastika is in fact a distinct symbol from that of the hakenkreuz, and that a NPOV encyclopedic article should reflect this fact as such. Here are my sources for this:
Among others many other sources, but these were some of the latest, most authoritative and paint some of the picture that I was attempting to neutrally outline as best I could with the usage of hakenkreuz (hooked cross) and as separate and distinct, as the Hindu, Jain, Buddhist, communities, as well as the continent of Asia and so called "Eastern world" understand the distinction. For example, one point that I made that was cited from various secondary sources both (so this is by no means original research), was that the swastika and the hakenkreuz are already well established different words, as well as symbols, in Japan and the East broadly. The word for swastika is manji in Japanese, whereas the word for hakenkreuz, is hakenkroitsu. Furthermore, Hindu, Buddhist, and Jain communities consider it incorrect and downright offensive that much of the Western world sometimes (but increasingly less so) fails to make such a distinction. My edits do not take preference for one "world view" or another, but pointed out where the word is used in one manner and which, and where the other word predominates. Ultimately, there is no "righting of great wrongs" here, but a "righting of encyclopedic error" or perhaps an encyclopedic delay in translating the current academic and journalistic consensus (see above) to the wikipedia article on this topic.
In the interest of full disclosure, I will also be working on a draft article called Draft:Hakenkreuz (Hooked Cross) at the same time that I changed some sections of this article to reflect these facts consistently across all relevant pages of the encyclopedia.
Thank you, and looking forward to any feedback on this matter. Since a great deal of work went into building these edits out, I would appreciate if we decide to revert the last revert if a consensus is reached to move forward representing the facts as I presented them. However, as always in the interest of harmony, I will not be making any further edits on this page and topic until such consensus has been reached. ♥ Th78blue ( talk)♥ 20:21, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
the more recent academic...opinion that the swastika is in fact a distinct symbol from that of the hakenkreuzplease. Tewdar 20:27, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
The swastika...But the hakenkreuz...quote gives me the impression that these terms are being used as synonyms, rather than distinct. Tewdar 20:55, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
Bibliography
♥ Th78blue ( talk)♥ 12:17, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
♥ Th78blue ( talk)♥ 00:58, 8 February 2022 (UTC)My comment suggesting maintaining or “branding” the swastika as negative in the U.S. and Europe touched many raw nerves. A few months after the Zoom panel, the editor(s) of Macro Viewpoints, an online publication, wrote: “Hmmm! So now the Svastik is a symbol of ‘white superiority’? That’s a new one for us!” It is true that many Westerners associate the word swastika with past and present graphic expressions of racist white supremacy. Nonetheless, if those billions who revere the swastika insist that the Nazi hakenkreuz is not their symbol, then their belief must be respected.
While recognising Th78blue's good faith in raising this issue, there is a risk of falling into the trap of wp:righting great wrongs. Wikipedia follows common use in English-language media and the German word has not yet gained acceptance. The lead as currently written seems to me to reflect fairly the differing perspectives. But I can see a case for an additional section at the end of the article that describes contemporary efforts to reappraise and reframe this 20th century usage in a more world-wide perspective. It seems me that this would be a more productive way forward than trying to change the existing text significantly. -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 12:56, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
It is spreading bad image of Hinduism and as it also shows that Christianity is inferior than Hinduism.. 2402:3A80:165A:3D6B:0:1C:A4DF:2801 ( talk) 07:57, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Swastika has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Hi Team, This page requires editing because it is portraying our holy swastika symbol as Nazi Hakenkreuz symbol which are totally different. Our community is getting hatred due to this misrepresentation of symbol. In our religion swastika is a symbol of peace and prosperity.
Request you to please remove Nazi references from this. Dhirajadvani081991 ( talk) 20:29, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Swastika has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Swastika and Hakenkreuz (hooked cross) are two different symbol.Hakenkreuz (hooked cross) symbol used by the Nazi Party in Germany, and later by the Third Reich. Adolf Hitler chose it as the symbol of the German Workers Party after he joined where Swastika is a totally different than Hakenkreuz (hooked cross). It is belong to hindu, buddiest and jain religion. It is used as a symbol of divinity and spirituality in Indian religions, including Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism. 103.133.123.160 ( talk) 06:19, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
I have strong opposition on the line. The swastika symbol, 卐 or 卍, today primarily recognized in the West for its use by the Nazi party,[1] is an ancient religious icon in various Eurasian cultures. What Nazi party used was Hooked Cross and not Swastika. Swastika is one of the holy symbol of Hinduism and it represent Sun. I think this page should be update with this information. Following are some references supporting this data. [1] 192.55.18.36 ( talk) 10:42, 18 February 2022 (UTC)