Monday, December 03, 2007

That Fascist Solar Cross

There are many simple geometric symbols that resonate deeply with the human psyche. Examples include the circle, the sunburst, the swastika, various spirals, the cross, and other radially symmetrical designs.

Neuropsychologists have confirmed what Carl Jung intuited a century ago: these basic geometric designs are hard-wired in the human brain, interacting via the visual cortex with symbolic representations buried deep in the regions of the brain where the primal responses to stimuli are rage, awe, and fear.

This helps explains why various symbolic designs exert a fascination over the mind that transcends time and culture. Variants on the most basic symbols were scratched on ivory or painted on cave walls before the dawn of the Neolithic. As prehistoric symbologies passed into historic times, the designs were elaborated and extended, and developed complex cultural and mythological associations to accompany their instinctive fascination.

Variants on the solar crossOne such design is known as the solar cross or the sun wheel, and consists of a simple four-part cross overlaid on a circle. As the Indo-European tribes exploded out of Central Asia in the third millennium before Christ, they brought with them the solar cross, using it to represent a wheel on the chariot that carried the sun god across the sky.

According to the Wikipedia entry on the sun cross:

The sun cross, a cross inside a circle, is one of the oldest and most universal religious symbols, and a popular neopagan solar symbol. It is also known as the suncross, solar cross, sun wheel, sunwheel, sun disc.

In neopaganism, the terms sun cross and sun wheel are sometimes also used to refer to swastikas, fylfots and Celtic crosses, understood as cognate symbols.

The design recurs in many variants across all human cultures. A version known as the Caddo cross was used by prehistoric Indians in what is now the southeastern United States. Other variants on the solar cross can be found in India, China, Africa, and Europe. Pagan versions were merged with the Christian cross in Europe as the continent was converted to Christianity in the first millennium.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

The Celtic crossI mention all this background because the pagan version of the solar cross known as Odin’s Cross, and its Christian successor, the Celtic Cross, have been cited as evidence that the Flemish separatist party Vlaams Belang is a white supremacist organization.

There is no dispute that Odin’s Cross has been used as a white power symbol in Europe. But that usage is a recent and minor development, and is hardly the only purpose to which the solar cross has been put. The design can be found in a wide variety of contexts, both pagan and Christian, throughout Europe.

The Anti-Defamation League — which can hardly be called an apologist for White Power causes — cautions its members not to assume automatically that Odin’s Cross is a White Power symbol. Here’s the entry in the ADL’s database of extremist symbols, logos and tattoos:

Symbol Type General Racist Symbol
Also Known As “Odin’s Cross”
Traditional Use/Origins The symbol for the Celts of ancient Ireland and Scotland; also used as a Christian symbol
Hate Group/Extremist Organization  Neo-Nazis, White Supremacists
Extremist Meaning or Representation  International white pride
Background/History This is one of the most popular symbols for neo-Nazis and white supremacists. First popularized by the Ku Klux Klan, the symbol was later adopted by the National Front in England and other racists such as Don Black on his Web site, Stormfront, and the racist band Skrewdriver to represent international “white pride.” It is also known as Odin’s Cross. It is important to note that the Celtic Cross is used widely today in many mainstream and cultural contexts. No one should assume that a Celtic Cross, divorced from other trappings of extremism, automatically denotes use as a hate symbol. [emphasis added]

I asked a Flemish team headed by ProFlandria to look into the Celtic Cross as it is used by Vlaams Belang and in other contexts in Flanders and the rest of Europe. Here’s what he had to say:
- - - - - - - - -
The Celtic crossWe’re going to descend into some arcana of World War One lore here, but bear with us — it’s worth it. As a quick note to any who try to follow our breadcrumbs: The text below contains multiple references to the river “Yser”. Today, the modern Dutch spelling is “Ijzer” — but the older spelling is identical to the French one (even now), and all English-language publications will use the older/French spelling. Googlers beware…

We discovered the Flemish WW1 headstone designed by Joe English [shown at right]. The design came about as an initiative from the Flemish nationalists entrenched at the Yser front lines. The intent was to provide a memorial in the soldiers’ own language, as an alternative to the French-only design which was the official Belgian government design. Several variants of the “official” design (black crosses) are visible in the attachment [seen below]; the caption on the photo reads: “ADINKERKE — Cemetery of the Brave Belgians”.

The Celtic crossThe Joe English design is in the shape of a Celtic Cross. The vertical bar is inscribed “AVV”, the horizontal bar “VVK”. The acronyms stand for “Allen Voor Vlaanderen” (All For Flanders) and “Vlaanderen Voor Kristus” (Flanders For Christ). This was the slogan of the Catholic Flemish students. The tombstone proper has the following inscription: “Hier liggen hun lijken als zaden in ‘t zand / Hoop op den oogst O Vlaanderland” (Here lie their bodies like seeds in the sand / Hope for the harvest O Flanderland). Above the verse is an outline of a seagull, symbol of the Flemish Students’ Movement. On the other hand, the “official” Belgian government designs all included the caption “Mort Pour La Patrie” (Died for the Fatherland).

For the purpose of our original puzzle, however, the important fact is that the Celtic Cross was used here as a Christian symbol. Moreover, any theory that its use by Flemish nationalists at that time implies a “white power” symbolism can be easily refuted by looking at the official government memorials: several of those are also Celtic Crosses. Indeed, it is not the design of the headstone’s Cross that determines the Flemish nationalist “content”, but the inscriptions upon it.

The Celtic crossTherefore, we can propose the following reasonable hypothesis. Joe English may or may not have chosen the Celtic Cross specifically because of his Irish background, but the basic shape appears to have been unremarkable in its use as a burial symbol — its use by the Belgian government for one of their official war memorial designs attests to this. However, by adding the Flemish nationalism-inspired inscriptions the complete design became a symbol for the movement. When the Service for Military Gravestones crushed more than half — over 500 — to build a gravel road in 1925 their symbolic power would only have increased. This link is a general reference to the events; the government agency that destroyed some of the headstones is named on a Dutch-only page. The Yser Tower, designed as a peace monument, was also intended to protect the gravesites. The first Tower was destroyed by “unknown persons” in a bombing in 1946 (likely with Belgian state collusion), but the crypt survived and it still houses some of the headstones and the bodies they marked.

The hypothesis above explains the Celtic Cross as the symbol of Flemish nationalism during and after the First World War. It would be reasonable to suggest that the political inheritors of the original World War One movement would see the plain Celtic Cross as a simplified representative of the Joe English headstone design. The Flemish movement’s adoption of the Celtic Cross predates any later “white power” uses, and it has no relation to it.

Here’s a slightly different account, from another source:

In 1914, when World War I broke out, king Albert I appealed to the pride of the Flemish population to defend the country. ‘People of Flanders,’ he said ‘remember the Battle of the Golden Spurs’. But because he was well aware that Flanders was considered after the French speaking part, he promised Flanders ‘equality in right and fact’… after the war.

Many thousands of Flemish boys were drafted or volunteered. For four long years, they lived, like all soldiers in the misery of mud and danger. In the Westhoek more people fell in battle than there had ever lived before…

In the army, the majority of the soldiers was Flemish, while almost all officers were French speaking. On top of that, the Flemish had to face humiliation and oppression, exactly because they were Flemish.

The protest following this treatment lead to the Front Movement. Its immediate goals were the protection and the stimulation of Flemish consciousness. The movement was prohibited and had to go underground. Then, the Flemish soldiers opened their threefold plan: self-government for Flanders, no more war and peace among all people, no matter their conviction. Nowadays this is translated: freedom, peace, tolerance.

All Belgian soldiers who fell, including the numerous Flemish boys, were given an official tombstone with the French inscription ‘Mort pour la Patrie’. To give the Flemish a Flemish tombstone, in 1916, the ‘Comité voor Heldenhulde’ (committee for hero’s tribute) was founded. With the money they collected among the Flemish soldiers, they created the famous ‘Heldenhuldezerkjes’: a cross with the inscription AVV-VVK (Alles voor Vlaanderen — Vlaanderen voor Kristus: All for Flanders — Flanders for Christ).

This proved to be a thorn in the eyes of some enemies of the Flemish Movement. Even before armistice, a number of tombstones were painted over, and in 1925 more than 500 ‘Heldenhuldezerkjes = Flemish tombstones’ were smashed.

An interesting source of additional information can be found in a comment #239 by zarxos on one of yesterday’s posts at Little Green Footballs:

Also, Odin’s Cross has been used as a symbol for Breton nationalism as well (i.e. for the independence of France’s province of Brittany). Just in case enough meanings of it haven’t been brought up already.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

The general conclusion to be drawn from all this is that the Celtic Cross or Odin’s Cross has been used historically as a symbol for nationalism, and not just Flemish nationalism. The design was later co-opted by a variety of white power groups with no connection to the Flemish nationalist movement.

Under the current PC regime that holds most of Western culture in thrall, nationalism is frowned upon and thought to be inherently racist. I have no argument to counter this assertion; I simply disagree with it.

In fact, instead of “nationalist”, I prefer the word “patriotic”, which indicates a love of one’s country, one’s culture, and one’s homeland. Patriotic peoples can live side-by-side peacefully in separate nations, and can support each other in their desire for autonomy in their respective countries. A patriotism for one’s homeland, be it Brittany, Flanders, Frisia, or England, is not only a normal and healthy thing; it is a positive good.

To condemn automatically as “racist” symbols that are patriotic or nationalistic is to ignore the normal and virtuous impulses that have motivated and ordered human affairs since the dawn of history.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Another unsavory aspect of many of the attacks on Vlaams Belang has been to base them on photographs, or on objects found in the background of videos. A photograph alone is evidence of nothing.

Witness the photos of Richard Nixon with Jimmy Carter, or of Winston Churchill with Josef Stalin. No serious person would take these as evidence that Jimmy Carter supports conservative Republicans, or that Winston Churchill was a communist.

The use of photos of in this manner is especially disingenuous when the subject’s publicly stated positions, policy initiatives, legislative actions, political alliances, and other public behaviors overwhelmingly contradict the tendentious conclusions drawn from such photographs.

If I happen upon a photo of Dennis Kucinich taken alongside Robert Byrd — which is not an unthinkable possibility, given that both are in the same political party — common sense would not lead me to assume that Mr. Kucinich is an enthusiastic supporter of the Ku Klux Klan.

Only an invincible ignorance of (or disinterest in) the facts on the ground can lead to arguments based solely on associations discovered in photographs.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Finally, an explanation is in order about why we have gone to all this time and trouble about such relatively trivial matters.

Many commenters and emailers have been advising us to ignore the increasingly shrill and overheated accusations directed at us, Filip Dewinter, Vlaams Belang, etc. Readers are understandably tired of all this pointless argument, and are ready to move on.

I’m just as sick of all this nonsense as any of you are. It has consumed all my spare time and energy for more than six weeks, and there is nothing I would like better than to be shut of it.

But there is a crucial task that must be completed before we can move on.

Baseless accusations and smear attacks have been launched at someone. If they are not answered fully and factually, the resulting silence can be taken as confirmation of the allegations. This is especially true in the Internet Age.

If we do nothing to answer these charges, then they effectively become the public record as far as the internet is concerned. Under these circumstances, running a Google search on “Vlaams Belang Celtic cross white power” will turn up all the accusations with no opposing point of view.

So one of our primary jobs, as custodians of a portion of the factual record, is to present these refutations as clearly and accurately as we can, including links to multiple sources so as to ensure the best possible coverage of the issue.

It’s not what I want to spend my time doing — I’d rather be blogging the Counterjihad instead — but Vlaams Belang is a party worth supporting, and deserves better than the hatchet job that has constituted the bulk of the record up until now.

So skip all this crap if you want, and go on to the more important stuff.

But five or ten years from now people searching on the internet for information on this topic will have more to draw on than the tendentious and inadequate material that has been the norm up until now.

Bear with me if you can. We’re almost done.


Curtis said...

I've made many posts in the past regarding the use of the sun-cross by certain political and media elements in this country and around the world. It's all over the place. Rarely does a day go by where I don't spot numerous sun-crosses behind the likes of Hillary, Obama, Edwards, Giuliani and various other top figures.

Notice that in one of your photos on this post, the large one, there is a dollar bill $ sign in the middle of the sun-cross.

Mr. Smarterthanyou said...

But if you look at the ADL's list of racist symbols, you find NO COMMUNIST SYMBOLS even though communists killed more people than Hitler.

Anonymous said...

Was this huge U.S. railroad racist? Why, you or your parents may have even paid money to ride one of their trains! Santa Fe Railway Logo

Better check what kind of trains will be running under your Christmas tree, wouldn't want to be accused, would you?

Ed Mahmoud said...

Interesting indeed. I still have my suspicions about Mr. DeWinter, but it would seem there is a possibility that the dreaded white cross on his book shelf is not the smoking gun of White Supremacism.

Zonka said...

I guess the airforce will also have to abandon their gun-sights or be labelled white supremacists, perhaps a suitable alternative gun-sight would be the peace-sign....

Ed Mahmoud said...

Negative on the peace sign. Per a thread at LGF before I was banned, based on research of 'Babbazee;, who may be Jewish, or maybe Italian, or both, and who has studied the Lakota religion under a Sioux medicine man, there are literally dozens of runes of the Pre-Christian Europeans, and they are all signs of neo-Nazism.

Including what we call the peace sign or 'V for Victory; sign.

Anonymous said...

Thank you for posting this. I'm so sick of people saying that Dewinter and the Vlaams Belang are racist solely because Dewinter had a Celtic cross on his bookshelf.

1389 said...

Check out the halo behind Jesus' head in the three icons posted in this thread at GCP. Click on each thumbnail to get a better view.

Not a symbol of hatred, fascism, white supremacy, Nazism, or violence of any kind. 'Nuff said.

Alexis said...

Interesting. So, the Celtic Cross is a long-standing symbol of Flemish nationalism, with some racists attempting to hijack the symbol.

I will point out that the Ku Klux Klan used the American flag in many of its rallies, yet the American flag is not automatically considered to be a "white power" symbol simply because Klansmen have been known to use it. It is certainly not appropriate to revile the American flag simply because racists have attempted to hijack its symbolism.

Baal Hardonim (lord of lizards) advocates his ideas with all of the simplicity and repetition one would expect from Joseph Goebbels. And much like the "Big Lie" of Joseph Goebbels, Baal Hardonim's repetition does not make his lies any more true.

1389 said...

O/T: Dymphna, here's another good article on Kosovo:


Robohobo said...

Hey, all, try these on:

'Black' Student Union

'Native American' Study Group

'Gay/Lesbian' Student Union

'Black' Studies


Now to paraphrase a recent novel and movie "A Time to Kill" - imagine between the ticks, if it said "White'.

Why has it become wrong to be proud that I am a white man? Who sold us this stupid politically correct idea? (Yeah, I know who did, it is rhetorical.)

My ancestors came from Ireland. They were fleeing the famine. They were looking for a better life. Remember the signs? "No Irish Need Apply"? The Celtic Cross was and is an important symbol in Ireland. Is that entire nation rascist? Every graveyard in the Republic?

I am proud to have that heritage. The Irish are white people. (Really pale, BTW) Does that make us all rascists?

Who decided that this was alright? To brand an entire group of people as racsits? I refuse that tag.

I have a whole letter I have been writing in my spare time about LGF (echo chamber), Dr Sanity, GoV and fjordman and the current controversy. I may or may not publish it.

This whole game of whack-a-nazis has gotten out of control. What is the internet rule of commenting that when someone plays the 'Nazis' card that thread is dead? This whole thread needs to die.

VB are not Nazis.

The Nazis got their methods of tagging Jews from the Grand Mufti Of Jerusalem, a muslim. The muslims used it on all non-muslims, dhimmis.

Wearing a Celtic Cross does not make me a Nazis.

Saying I am proud to be a white Irish blooded American does not make me a Nazis.

This whole thing is so stupid.

Papa Whiskey said...

The cross-and-circle symbol may also be seen on the headstamps of military rounds that have met the standards of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).

The familiar "peace sign" had its origins as the logo for the 1950s British Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND). The design within the circle is a combination of the semaphore flag signals for "N" and "D."

Henrik said...

Hey Baron

Regarding your preference for patriotic over nationalist, there is a Danish saying, playing on the two words for being pro-country/people etc in Danish - national and nationalist:

"You are national(ly inclined) if you want to be master in your own house. You are nationalist if you want to be master in somebody else´s".

I realize "national" doesnt cover the same ground in english, but just wanted to mention it.


Zarxos said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Fernando A. Ramírez Martínez said...

Wait a second. the cross inside a circle is a very ancient symbol for terra, and in fact, it is still used in astronomy to identify earth.
The last thing I think about when I see it is white nationalism neither supremacism.

Unknown said...

"But five or ten years from now people searching on the internet for information on this topic"

I hope so, because if people are still trawling the 'net in ten years time, it means a certain 7th century cult still hasn't won.

Mikael said...

Ever seen the TV-series "Scrubs"?

It appears that The Sacred Heart Hospital is actually a den of crypto-fascists. The cunningness of the white supremacists subliminal machinations never ceases to amaze me!

Damon said...

Excellent post, Baron!

My first reaction to that photo was "that's a Celtic cross -- what's the problem?"
My surname is Kelly...;)

These symbols are very ancient -- the dreaded swastika is many thousands of years old.

It does seem to me that Charles Johnson et al are being sidetracked by trivial "symbolism" -- "Hey, that looks like a swastika" or "some neo-Nazis use that symbol" -- without taking the time to study the symbol and realize that there may be a long (and non-Nazi) history associated with it.

European history has very deep roots.

American history may be intense and important, but is certainly shallower in years. (BTW, that's not a criticism of the USA, or her history, just a statement of historical fact)

So, Baron and Dymphna, keep up the good work. You are quite right that there needs to be a "reply" in the public sphere -- on record -- and you have given a fine reply.

Anonymous said...

As a car enthusiast, I've always remarked on how similar the solar cross is to the logo of the German manufacturer, BMW.

(The BMW logo is usually said to represent an aircraft propellor although the likeness to the solar cross is remarkable).

Curiously its great rival Mercedes also uses a sun-like symbol, the famous three pointed star.

X said...

I just spotted another one on the cartons of an energy drink I buy. The little registration mark pon the inside of the lid is a solar cross - an odin's cross too, with the sticky-out bits! I wonder if the company that makes them is secretly nazi...

The Klan still wear that simpler derivation of the solar cross on their "uniforms", but those uniforms are based on very old catholic robes that are still worn at ceremonial processions in Spain. Complete with prominent solar cross on the breast.

I wonder how them klan klowns would feel knowing they're dressed like catholics...

AngleofRepose said...

Here is another picture of that tower.

It is indeed a Nationalist thing where they strive for independence. You'll note the dreaded rune that the lizards are convinced is a "white supremacist" symbol.

I myself have been heavily into symbolism ever since I discovered Led 4, or Zoso. Like many teenagers I had numerous doodles on my school folders - most of them runes. My favorite though, without knowing what it meant, was the egyptian cross, or ankh.

Charles and his minions have gone beyond ridiculous.

Well done, Baron.

braveheart said...

Dear fellows , this is much ado about nothing. I realise that unless its like mc donalds golden arches its hard for some to understand , but really even if we go back to the egyptian ankh which is also considered the root meaning of this sign among others, so what?.
Get a life ... Hey America and lil green footballs, you got much bigger problems ahead of you than this petty crap. FOCUS LADS FOCUS... the real enemy is out there and laughing at such absurd behaviour. Consider both your exoteric, mesoteric and esoteric arses kicked on this occasion.Oh and just to compound your confusion the cross sign is also observed and used by Islamic teaching in the similarity of how they mark out the symbology of the lataif ( subtle) also used in iconic christian art.

Now get back to the main subject at hand please, we need each other.

Regards Braveheart

A Guardian of Scotland

kepiblanc said...

And here is the Coat of Arms of the Danish Navy's Tactical Command.

CarnackiUK said...

For those who wish to see still more visual evidence of the use of this cross to honor the Flemish war dead of WW1 (as well as the fallen of Ireland, Scotland and Wales) there are 36 images of Flanders war memorials on view here:

Nyog of the Bog said...

"It does seem to me that Charles Johnson et al are being sidetracked by trivial "symbolism" -- "Hey, that looks like a swastika" or "some neo-Nazis use that symbol" -- without taking the time to study the symbol and realize that there may be a long (and non-Nazi) history associated with it."


Excellent point Damon, and to that I would only add, they remain, it appears, largely unreconstructed, by which I mean, like most Americans, they seem not to have expurgated themselves of the inculcated self-loathing planted in their skulls by our post-67 popular culture, education system, etc. They see a healthy, wholesome, domestic scene of children singing and are reminded of the 1950s and quite unawares, at a profound level, are perversely repulsed as they have been so conditioned to be. Add to that the power of suggestion applied to the symbols printed on the book covers the children holding and you have your desired effect.

laller said...

Well, well. That's the cross good and buried. I wonder if this will convince the critics. Acutally, I wonder if it will even make them think it over.

Now, on to the next symbol, the odal/ochala rune as found on one of the songbooks at a VB youth gathering... Am I the only one wondering if this symbol hunt will ever end?

No one can claim/hijack a symbol without the acceptance of the people(of the world).

AngleofRepose said...

Thanks carnackiuk.

I'm convinced that CJ has been talkin out his arse since day one.

Sodra Djavul said...

You will never convince a leftist ideological opponent once they have invoked the specter of Nazi horror.

The Lunatics Googling Fascist led by Charles Johnson will never see the light, even when advised by the ADL itself.

However, on the plus side, at least Charles is now linking directly to your site instead of linking to an unknown blog attacking your site.

The truth is there to see for anyone outside the thrall of leftist politically correct thought.

- Sodra

AngleofRepose said...

Regarding that rune on that book. Here is a different description of it and I assume it's original meaning:

This Rune represents possessions and the home. It is a symbol of ancestry and also signifies inheritance, materialistic and especially ancestral traditions and traits that help shape the Self.

Here is a similiar description.

Inherited property or possessions, a house, a home. What is truly important to one. Group order, group prosperity. Land of birth, spiritual heritage, experience and fundamental values. Aid in spiritual and physical journeys. Source of safety, increase and abundance.

That link also contains a picture of the rune on the flag in that second link I posted at 11:10. It's the rune called Algiz, or Protection. Here's the description:

The protective urge to shelter oneself or others. Defense, warding off of evil, shield, guardian.

Oh dear!

KGS said...

Thanks to the Baron and also to angleofreprose for posting the link to the Rune. It does complete the picture that the Baron and ProFlanderia have set for us.

The LGF crowd are up in a lather with the giving of "high fives" to each other and slapping C.Johnson on the back. But all for what, trying to please the Kos Kids who have already labeled the LGF site as a bunch of heel clicking neo-nazis?

And Johnson has the nerve to declare that "BabbaZee’s site utterly destroys Baron Bodissey’s denials". What a blowhard. Such a claim is utter nonsense, and calmer heads are savvy enough to tell the difference.

There is such a difference between the chatter of Charlie's chipmonks at LGF, and the discourse here at the GoV with the rational and reasonable.

Sooner or later many will grow tired of pleasing "the boss", and yearn for something that's challenging for the intellect.

X said...

What angelofrepose has written sort of ties in with some thoughts I had this morning on the matter. I was going to post them as a comment here, but they got too long.

Apologies for the spam. :)

AngleofRepose said...

KGS.. no prob.

And Johnson has the nerve to declare that "BabbaZee’s site utterly destroys Baron Bodissey’s denials".

I saw that. Declaring yourself the winner in an argument doesn't make it so. It makes you an arrogant ass. BabbaZee has gone into full meltdown too, with her comment at #170:

"Any Jews that support the VB and "white nationalists" like them are blind, bought, complicit, ignorant or insane."


AngleofRepose said...

Ya'll can call me Katrina from here on out. Or, what my brother used to call me.. Kastinka...


AngleofRepose said...

*waves at storagemanager at #189*

AOR...and what of the crap you are posting?

Oh, so you agree that what BZ posted was crap?


If you haven't noticed, I'm f*cking with you two, and having a bit of laugh. Have a nice day!

(sorry Baron, I'll stop now)

Mr. Smarterthanyou said...

So using LGF logic:

David Duke declared himself as a Republican, therefore all decent Republicans must quit the party. Ron Paul hangs with truthers too, so double the reason for all of us to unregister and denounce the GOP.

Since KKK Byrd is a Democrat, then all good Democrats (yeah, I know) should quit the Democrat party. Wait- I am sure there are at least 2 or 3 hard-core communists in the Democratic Party. So wow, no excuses!!

So we all need to agree to quit our parties. But what if we quit the GOP and the Dems don't, then they win!!!

I don't know enough about all the Euro parties to carry thru the analogy, but unilateral surrender because the enemy says you aren't fighting fair is stupid. And if the Lizard mob is stupid enough to not only care what the left has to say, but actually carry water for them, then screw them. Reading their latest thread, there are few posters who aren't fighting over who can give CJ the most satisfying "Lewinski".

Those guys scare me like the sheep in "Animal Farm". They will march you to the gallows, singing the praises of their wise leader, with the same enthusiasm as any Bolshevik.

Cobra said...

When will we learn to protect our old cultural images and fight the schmacks who try to kill any exchange of idea with the overused term of "racism"?
We should be proud of our Christian European heritage and promote at least with the vigor the enemies attack it.

Unknown said...

You've got to be kidding me! Are you people mentally challeged or are you trying to put one over us?

It's not up to you to say the odin's cross is not a white power symbol. Just like you can't wear a swastika and say that you feel a strong connection with it pre-1930's uses and you're not at all a nazi. To wear the swastika has a certain meaning, and the same is true of the odin's cross. There are many symbols out there. Why choose the ones that white power types use to identify themselves? The answer is obvious: to appeal to the white power movement.

By the way, the old "I don't hate black people, I just love my own white people" is an old KKK and white power claim from American racists. If you can't tell that that claim is racist, then you are a moron.

X said...

I still see hindus wearing swastikas. Are they white supremacists too?

Sodra Djavul said...

Wow, David sure does love Charles Johnson, doesn't he?

David, if you allow leftists to influence and deny you a link to your heritage over *gasp* what they might think about it, any impartial individual would have to redirect your personal insult of "moron" to you, my friend, not any of us.

Quite frankly, I don't give a damn what the overmedicated fruitcake BabbaZee claims is "evidence." If I were to hang out proclaiming the divinations of a drugged up invalid as gospel, I would justifiably belong in a mental institution.

No one is attempting to "pull the wool over your eyes." The truth is there for you to see. The vitriolic reaction you've given it indicates you have zero intention of approaching this issue with an open mind. So be it.

- Sodra

AngleofRepose said...

Hey David,

Can you quote someone here who said "the odin's cross is not a white power symbol"?


KGS said...

David: "Just like you can't wear a swastika and say that you feel a strong connection with it pre-1930's uses and you're not at all a nazi. To wear the swastika has a certain meaning, and the same is true of the odin's cross."

I was waiting for soemthing like this to come up.

Please look here:

Only a person ignorant of other cultures and individual countries' experiences and history could manage to say what David just said.

*L* KGS www.tundratabloid.blogspot.comktlgi

Unknown said...

Archonix: That is a comment only a white supremacist would think up. Fess up: do you believe that european culture cannot be separated from racial background? That therefore the white RACE (and not just european culture) needs to be defended? If yes, then you are a racist.

There is no need arguing with someone like you since you have your own self-deceptions and dissimulations that cannot be penetrated. But for everyone else: as far as the use of symbols like the swastika or odin's crossm it is all about the context: whether chonological or geographic. In 1900 I suppose it would not be suspicious at all to wear a swastika. But in 2007 it is an extremely reliable indicator that you have yourself a nazi, especially in Europe where it has a particular and not at all hidden history. Some dude in a tiny remote village in India or in the mountains of Nepal has a weak connection to that history; for him the symbols have been used continously since time immemoral, and he may no little about europe at all. But if the hindu dude wearing a swastika is an English speaking urbanite from Mumbai who reads the newspaper and the internet, then he doesn't get the same free pass as the guy from the remote village. He knows what he is doing with that symbol; he knows the MEANING of the symbol; to use the symbol is to SAY something that the villiage dude could not say with the same symbol.

The whole line of denial on the site reminds me of Holocaust denial. The people who seem to think that killing jews would be a good thing also deny that it happened. In this case, the white supremacists deny that there symbols have a white supremacist meaning. Why? Maybe someone else has a better answer.

Unknown said...

I of course never denied the following: that you all admit that the odin's cross CAN and HAS BEEN used as a white power symbol.

I am saying that the very distinctive stylized version seen on various white power forums, flags, and on DeWinter's shelf (as opposed to the sort you might see on a grave stone) just IS a white power symbol and that the best we could possibly say about someone who uses it is that they are grossly ignorant and insensitive to the realities of european white power groups. But I am assuming that DeWinter and others are not at all ignorant of these movements. Since it seems demonstrable that that is at least part of VB's past, it is incomprehensible that using the symbol has exactly the effect intended: to show solidarity with skinhead toughs and to bask in their street cred.

Sodra Djavul said...

Methinks David, and many like him, assumes facts not yet entered into evidence.

Such as, "the Vlaams Belang are Nazis, and we're only arguing over whether or not we should ally ourselves with them."

Another favorite: "The Vlaams Belang have assigned a political priority to the pardoning of those accused by the Belgian courts of Nazi collaboration. This proves they are Nazis."

I agree with neither position.

Vlaams Belang = Flemish Independence
Flemish Independence circa 1940 = Allying with Hitler

While the second decision in hindsight was in error, given the information at the time I fail to understand how anyone could find fault. For Christ's sake, the grandfather of the current President of the United States has some of these same unsavory links, and far less circumstantial than anything LGF has presented against the VB.

All history is written by the victors. But even that record indicates outright amazement AFTER the war at the extent of the Holocaust.

After the Civil War, the United States did not go on a politically-motivated purge of the financial interests of all "Confederate collaborators." Why the VB advocating a position preventing the Belgian politicos from doing so against those Flemish who fought for their independence has raised such vitriol at otherwise rational individuals is dumbfounding.

The education system in the United States is clearly lacking when grown men and women have either lost or abandoned the capability of rational thought.

- Sodra

Alexis said...


Are Americans supposed to discontinue using the American flag, also known as the Stars and Stripes, because Klansmen keep on using it? Do you realize that David Duke has been seen next to an American flag...? Are Jews supposed to stop using the Star of David as a symbol because Jewish racists keep on using it? Does one need to keep on changing symbols every six months because some racists try to hijack their meaning? Get real!

Do you realize that only two political groups presently use the Iron Cross as a symbol -- neo-Nazis and Little Green Footballs? What does that say about Baal Hardonim (lord of lizards) and his online lizard sanctuary? Hmmm?

Unless and until you call Charles Johnson to task for the use of the Iron Cross among his followers, you are being disingenuous.

X said...

So from a single comment you've decided I'm a white supremacist? Man... you know me so well.

There is no need arguing with someone like you since you have your own self-deceptions and dissimulations that cannot be penetrated.

Irony. :)

in actual fact one of the people I had in mind owns a shop near where I used to live. He's a devout Hindu, as such things area measured in Hinduism, and he likes to point out to anyone who asks the historical meaning and symbology of the swastika, which is a very important symbol in Hindu thought and religious practice. Now obviously my pointing out this next part just makes me racist, but he's very obviously indian, I think he's from down the pointy bit somewhere, so naturally the first reaction of a lot of people seeing his little swastika scarf thing is to goggle and question their own sanity. Then he explains the reality denied to them by PC rhetoric. I like to think he does a service to reason and enlightenment.

Culture is culture. He's as English as I am.

Now shut the h*ll up and get back to your little echo chamber, sir.

AngleofRepose said...

It's as simple as this, David: the Flemish have a deeper history of using that symbol than the current crop of hatemongers. They are not going to allow you, CJ or a bunch of leftists to dictate to them what they're allowed to display. Period.

Jimmy the Dhimmi said...

You guys are acting like a bunch of "moderate muslims." Rather than deal with the fact that Vlaams Belang has a nefarious past, ripe with white supremacism and antisemitism, you pretend that there is no problem, and that anyone who disagrees is a "leftist."

How absurd. Recognize and repudiate the past ideology of your political party, rather than pretending there is nothing wrong. Take a lesson from Robert Spencer.

The swastika is a buddhist symbol for christ's sake, I seriously doubt german buddhists would go around waving the banner and claiming everyone else has a problem.

Alexis said...

jimmy the dimmi:

Do you repudiate the American flag because it can be found on David Duke's web site?

(This question has an answer of yes or no.)

AngleofRepose said...

That's an excellent point Alexis.

Hey David, what do you think of this picture being used by indybay to prove that LGF are fascists?

You think CJ and the guy who wears that jacket are going to allow indybay types to dictate to them?


"ripe with antisemitism"? Read this. Read it with an open mind because that blogger (and I agree with him) doesn't deny the murky past. I won't dismiss you as a "leftist", I'll dismiss you if you're not coming to this debate with honesty, integrity and an open mind.

X said...

The swastika is a buddhist symbol for christ's sake, I seriously doubt german buddhists would go around waving the banner and claiming everyone else has a problem.

Actually they do.

It's still displayed on hindu and buddhist temples in Germany because it's a religious symbol, and ar ecent attempt by the EU to outlaw the symbol throughout the european union (whilst, incidentally, ignoring communist symbology) had to be dropped because hindus and buddhists across the entire union protested quite loudly (and legally) about the imposition on their freedom of speech.

Mr. Smarterthanyou said...

So david, the only people who can determine if a symbol is hate or good are liberals?

Or just the easily offended(liberals)?

Or who?

Why isn't Che a hate symbol? Or the hammer and sickle?

Or the red star?

Or the Islamic Crescent? Those that follow the way of the crescent want to kill all infidels. Isn't that a hate symbol?

CarnackiUK said...

David said:
There are many symbols out there. Why choose the ones that white power types use to identify themselves? The answer is obvious: to appeal to the white power movement.

Yes, the answer is obvious, but not the one you propose.

Given that that particular cross has been a rallying symbol for supporters of Flemish independence since at least 1914, why should the Flemish suddenly stop using it just because a bunch of johnny-come-lately Nazi wannabes decide to adopt it more than 50 years later?

So your position is, basically, that anything the tiny handful of Nazis wants should immediately be relinquished to them?

Anonymous said...

Four of my friends have Celtic crosses tattooed on their arms. I'm Irish and had no idea this was considered a white power symbol until this whole spat erupted.

X said...

I'm sorry to say that your friends will have to repudiate this association immediately and submit to having their arms chopped off in order to remove the hated symbol

It's for the greater good.

Ernest said...

David said:
"The whole line of denial on the site reminds me of Holocaust denial."

Oh crap! According to David now we want to kill 6 million Jews.

Conservative Swede said...


David is a caricature of a Holocaust minimizer/trivializer. If he would accuse the guy further down the street of having stolen his bike, and the guy denies it, then David would compare him to a Holocaust denier.

So if the appointed bike thieving culprit denies being a Nazi, then he's just like a Holocaust denier, and becomes even more of a Nazi, which he will deny even more strongly, and why would oppose it so vehemently and be so upset about it if he wasn't really a Nazi... ad infinitum.

Vonschlepp said...

Hello Gates of Vienna from Canada.

Are firefighters and emergencie sevices Nazis? Well if Charles Johnson from LGF were to tour my fire departement he could come to that conclusion seeing he has some paranoid fixation on runic symbols. I noticed an excact identical symbol on the side of our fire trucks and shoulder patch in our fire station in this link here:

This is also known as the Hagal rune here:

The Nazis used this same Hagal rune for the SS Nord Division here:

The Maltese Cross:

Been along time reader of Gate of Vienna and I'm stongly on your side. I'm getting very pissed off with Charles Johnson and his arogrant followers at LGF. I would'nt think that the United States of Goym would understand European politics. It won't be the Gramscian pacified scocialist who will tackle this Jihad problem in Europe.


Conservative Swede said...

David wrote: By the way, the old "I don't hate black people, I just love my own white people" is an old KKK and white power claim from American racists. If you can't tell that that claim is racist, then you are a moron.

An Inquisition type of argument. A perfect one, since the accusation in itself guarantees the guilt of the accused. There's no way to get out of this fox trap with less than that you claim that you explicitly hate your own people, and would like to see them perish.

But if you'd leave just the tiniest of tiniest little love for your own people (if your are white that is, the Davids of our world have a racist approach to this) then any "moron" can tell that you are a racist, only making excuses. And the more you say you like black people or are friends with Jews, the worse it gets. Then you are the wily, deceptive kind. No, only declaring the absolute hate of your own people will suffice. Well, if you like most people had just shut up, complete indifference about the issue does fine. But once you have opened your mouth and expressed even the tiniest of love for your own people, there's only one way: total humiliation and denunciation.

And in this we see the whole Western society in miniature. Since people do not know how to defend themselves against these Inquisition type of questions, and they can be spawned by any nobody, the effect is a society where people in practice hate their own society and strive for it to perish (consciously or unconscionably, but always in practice).

This is the whole situation, of the fall of the West, in a nutshell. It isn't more complicated than this. This is the knot that has to be untied. Once done, the rest will take care of itself.

AngleofRepose said...

Holy Dhimmification, Batman!

OVERWORKED nurses have been ordered to stop all medical work five times every day to move Muslim patients’ beds so they face towards Mecca.

The lengthy procedure, which also includes providing fresh bathing water, is creating turmoil among overstretched staff on bustling NHS wards.

But despite the havoc, Mid- Yorkshire NHS Trust says the rule must be instigated whenever possible to ensure Muslim patients have “a more comfortable stay in hospital”.

H/T to Kate at SDA

Nyog of the Bog said...

Excellent point, CS, precisely the trap that the American Radio Talk Show host Don Imus, fell into a year ago or so, of which you likely are aware of. His return yesterday, was punctuated with the same nauseating groveling and self-loathing apologies which permeated the days leading to his termination. His real mistake, regardless of the outcome, was to have ever accepted the premise of his inquisitors at the onset. Following that, no matter what he said, he was doomed.

Vonschlepp said...

Seems to me the United States Government supports nationalism, Hawiiain nationalism it seems.

CarnackiUK said...

Just like you can't wear a swastika and say that you feel a strong connection with it pre-1930's uses and you're not at all a nazi. To wear the swastika has a certain meaning, and the same is true of the odin's cross.

When I lived just off Venice Beach, the local Hell's Angels were highly visible, with iron crosses a-danglin'. Since this is also Charles Johnson's neighborhood, I wonder if he has approached any Angels and informed them, you know, mano a mano, biker to biker, that they're Nazis?

Sonny Barger would be a good one to start with.

AngleofRepose said...

Oh brother. So I decide to refresh what looked like a dead thread and find the galactically stupid chipmonk by the name of Render claiming that lizard "RE" is me.


STFU & STFD, render. And I don't know whether Sodra & reliapundit are going on other websites "lying" about why they were banned because I don't stalk them the way you apparently do, but you need to stop lying about ME. I post under one name pal.

Now FO and go Lewinski your master.

Ed Mahmoud said...


Don't give that site any more traffic.

They apparently speak badly of me as well, and I figure the long timers know what I'm really about, and Johnson's harpies' opinions of me don't matter, anyway.

Sodra Djavul said...

You should learn to ignore the comments on LGF. Become ambivalent.

As for me, I mentioned very honestly and openly on this site why I was banned over at LGF. Direct confrontation with Sharmuta over the Fjordman issue. I don't hide it. Neither do I hide the fact that CJ deleted every single post I made that night, including those unrelated to this whole issue.

They will only get more vitriolic as their irrelevance, by their own design, begins to sink in. Simply ignore them. They really hate that... :)

- Sodra

Nemesis6 said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Zonka said...


Well, alright we're nitpicking... But how does that change the facts?

And calling on Pat Condell as a character witness is just rich... The guy who have no qualms about painting Christianity or any other religion with the same brush as Islam! So to use Pat Condell in this matter you would have to say that Nazis and Christians as wells as Buddhists and Hindus are two parts of the same coin! Is that your view?

Sodra Djavul said...

I, for one, refuse to take any opinion seriously if it must resort to the leftist accusation of "racism."

So Dewinter would be unhappy if his daughter married a Moor. Most fathers would. At least the ones I hang out with.

No one is discussing whether white men, or brown men, or green men are superior, but what an involved father honestly feels about his daughter's wisdom and, ultimately, the reality of what his grandchildren would be forced to tolerate.

I, for one, having been force-fed since my birth with multiculturist propaganda, no longer mind the accusations of "racist" or "Nazi."

Pure leftist mental masturbation.

Enjoy your little trip.

- Sodra

KGS said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
KGS said...


David: "Just like you can't wear a swastika and say that you feel a strong connection with it pre-1930's uses and you're not at all a nazi. To wear the swastika has a certain meaning, and the same is true of the odin's cross."

David fails to mention the use of the swastika by the Finns, who are clearly using it in a NON-FASCIST, but in an entirely historical way.

Explain that one for me.

Simon de Montfort said...

Interesting comment about "RENDER" at LGF: he seemed normal before, but has become one of the Chief Attack Dogs over there

When I suggested that VB had changed, his resonse was "bullsh+t" and to end his message with 'wave bye bye'

The Queen of commenters is a "Mandy Manners", a Bourbon-soaked Diva of Personal Disaster who shouts down dissent

Like a few others here I have Lingering Doubts about a some of VB's curent leadershi---or about their judgmnt when younger. I am mostly convinced and Time is getting Very Short, and I do want them in my foxhole

As for Johnson, he is acting like what his name is a slang term for in the States.........

CarnackiUK said...

The Queen of commenters is a "Mandy Manners", a Bourbon-soaked Diva of Personal Disaster who shouts down dissent

Simon, please don't knock a Jerry Springer classic in the making!

Actually I feel sorry for the oxymoronic Ms Manners. Some day day soon there'll be an AA equivalent for chronic blog addicts, but I doubt it will happen in time to save MM.

Baron Bodissey said...

Nemesis6 --

Gates of Vienna's rules about comments require that they be civil, temperate, on-topic, and show decorum. Your comment violated the last of these rules. We keep a PG-13 blog, and exclude foul language, explicit descriptions, and epithets. This is why I deleted your comment.

Use of asterisks is an appropriate alternative.

Unknown said...

My advice the Baron's comrades:

If there's truly no reason to be on the defensive, work towards reconciliation, and above all be understanding and empathetic. We are a deeply wounded peoples, and you must understand that. Show my Israel and her peoples love and acceptance. Show Israel's enemies hate and contempt. Blue skies will come and will smile on our heads, these black clouds shall pass.


Unknown said...

Of course every objection against what I said is baseless. I'll try to hit the main points, but first a general comment: All the "celtic crosses" linked to here look similar to the one on DeWinter's bookshelf in that they are all a plus sign (+) with a circle around it. But the bookshelf-cross has a very distinctive look, namely the look of the cross used by the white power types. That also goes for the Flemish war memorial, which, unlike the white power cross, is distinctively Christian in form: it has the shape of a crucifix rather than a + with four arms of equal length. But the "cross" seen in VB literature is not just similar to the cross used in white power circles, it is identical. Finally image of the rat with an armband is also suspiciously similiar to swastika armbands used by nazis.

1) I didn't anticipate that when I compared using the odin's cross to using a swastika, that the response would be that actually there is nothing wrong with using a swastika. So you would not object to DeWinter having a swastika on his bookshelf and VB using swastikas in their literature? That suggests something of the preposterous and slightly malodorous nature of the position you are trying to uphold with respect to the use of the odin's cross.

2) It is an empirical question whether the odin's cross is a traditional symbol of flemish nationalism. But all I see here is what is admitted to be "arcana of World War One lore." Were it a recognized symbol, no such research would be necessary. It would be common knowledge in Flanders. If it is not understood and taken to be have this meaning, then it does not have this meaning.

3) I do think that Che shirts and hammer/sickles are offensive. More to the point, if some left-wing group used a hammer and sickle in their literature, I would not believe them when they said that they're not communists and they just want to show that they are representing both industrial workers and farmers. I also am not happy about lgf jackets with iron crosses. (It should be noted, however, that the BRD still uses the iron cross symbol since it is not a specifically nazi innovation.) However, those jackets are an obvious parody of US motorcycle gang jackets, just as more generally the talk of "lizards" is meant to be a parody of the supposedly evil nature of lgf readers.

4) Sodra suggests I have some kind of bias against VB. My only bias is against racists. I would prefer to think of it a reasoned opinion. For me, there is no debate over whether to side with nazis or not. Nazis have a proven track for murder record that the islamicists can't match. I don't know about the flemish nazi collaborators. It would depend on the details about what they did, for example to jews.

5) paraphrasing: "David is just assuming guilt by association. So the US flag is supposed a hate symbol because used by KKK and David Duke?" The example is interesting. KKK uses the flag with the intent of showing that they are defending American values. But the American flag is not theirs; they're just trying to have some of its symbolic power rub off on them. The flag stands for the US, not the Klan. In the case of the odin's cross, the dominant usage is by the racists--and as far as I can tell they are the only ones who use the specific stylized version that is labeled "Celtic Cross" on the figure at the top of this post. Because of the VBs history and current stance on issues of race and heritage, it is reasonable to take that symbol at face value and assume that it is intentionally adopted because of its white power associations.

6) I shouldn't have mentioned the holocaust denial analogy. I merely meant something like this: there is a human tendency to believe what is convenient and in line with one's political goals. I think that is what is going on here, but that is not an argument against your view, more of an observation directed to any outside observers.

7) It is true that people abuse the charge of "racism." However, when you take that to mean that all charges of racism are spurious, then you are committing an obvious fallacy. What is a "real" racist then? What do you think is wrong with the views of someone like David Duke?

Incidentally, I actually am not an lgf-hanger-on. I actually agree with you that the comments section there tends to be a mutual congratulation society rather than a discussion or debate forum. Is it different here?

To me, it's obvious that loving your own white people is a racist attitude. It's a known ploy of David Duke and his ilk. But that is a different debate for a different day.

Unknown said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Unknown said...

Sorry for the double post.

One final thought. The original post cites wikipedia. But it omits this following from the article on the "celtic cross":

"This new political connotation has almost eclipsed the traditional meaning of the symbol in France, Italy and many other European countries. In France, the symbol was adopted by the groups Occident and the Groupe Union Droit. In Italy, the symbol has been banned from being shown within stadiums, as it is considered a sign of fascism and racism. Celtic crosses are also associated with political movements advocating greater independence or other measures, with respect to Celtic minorities, such as Breton nationalism."

Unknown said...

What does the celtic cross of the Breton nationalists look like?

Not like the stylized version at issue. See:

AngleofRepose said...


About that rat. Take a minute and browse this website.

They're anti-American, anti-capitalist and, I would submit, possibly anti-semitic. But that's not really my point. In case you don't know, vlaams jongeren means Flemish youth. So, it seems that the rat may be a youth thing, as I've not seen it anywhere else except on flemish youth sites (I could be wrong - it could be a Wallonian youth thing too).

Granted, their rat doesn't have an armband, but, and here's the thing: we don't know the context or history of the use of that rat by both socialist and capitalist youth, therefore the armband may mean absolutely nothing other than a declaration of, for example, Flemish independence.

Being judged by a jury of your peers means that all evidence, both pro and con, must be brought to light. What we're missing is history and context.

PS - I'm personally done with the Celtic/Odin's cross discussion. I believe you're barking up the wrong tree and besides, if all the evidence presented by the Baron still doesn't satisfy you - well, sorry, but you ain't worth the effort.

Unknown said...

That website is clearly a variation on neonaziism. For example, they recommend wearing Thor Steinart brand of clothing--used by neo-nazis to identify themselves.

So what's your point? I never said that there was something wrong with having a rat as a mascot--it's the odin's cross.

I have tried to show that the Baron's evidence is lacking, and so far no one has attempted to show that my reasoning is faulty. Where is the emprirical evidence I asked about? If it exists, I will change my mind

Unknown said...

It's also interesting that the website recommends "identity" rather than "racism" and "passion" rather than "hate." Sounds like a a familiar sort of PR campaign. (Why they like "Grand Illusion" rather than "300" I don't know.)

(BTW, I know that non-nazis also wear Thor Steinart, but when a political organization recommends wearing it, then you can draw the appropriate conclusion.)

AngleofRepose said...

Us: "Celtic Cross"

Them: "Odin's Cross!"

Us: "Cultural pride"

Them: "White pride!"

Us: ...

Them: "Neo-Nazi! Anti-Semitic! Racist!"

Us: "you're still here?" *chuckle* "could you get out of the way?.. we have work to do"

I'll just copy/paste what I said above - the Flemish have a deeper history of using that symbol than the current crop of hatemongers. They are not going to allow you, CJ or a bunch of leftists to dictate to them what they're allowed to display. Period. If you have a problem with it, take it up with them, cuz I'm done. BTW, you take out that symbol from the Breton white cross, it looks exactly like Dewinter's.


Conservative Swede said...


It is true that people abuse the charge of "racism." However, when you take that to mean that all charges of racism are spurious, then you are committing an obvious fallacy.

Interesting. In the part by you I quoted above, you just claimed that any objection to your charges of racism are spurious. That is obviously a fallacy. To expose such a fallacy is by no means a fallacy (are you following?). You continue above with yet another fallacy: the one of misrepresenting the whole argument. And now I have exposed this fallacy too.

Also I wonder why the "charge of" racism? Why not just disagreement, or strong disagreement? Is it a crime?

What do you think is wrong with the views of someone like David Duke?

His pathological anti-Semitism is the first thing that comes to mind. And quite as the average liberal he judges people by their skin colour and want to see their destiny depending on that. Also, quite as the average liberal, he conflates nationalism with Nazism.

To me, it's obvious that loving your own white people is a racist attitude.

The mask comes off, as they say... When Western people love their own people they do not love "white people". Norweigians love Norwegians, Italians love Italians. But your mind is so infected by racial thinking that to you it's all about whites, blacks, etc for you. In this twisted perspective any love of ones own becomes "racist".

Some say that in America this is different, since the perception is that there is no shared ethnicity. This and the history of black slaves, have made racial thinking more pivotal among Americans. (Europeans had black slaves too, but not in their own countries.) But even so, to say that you love white people does in no way amount to white supremacism. To care for your own people (even if you identify your own as "white") and state that they have some basic rights and interests (in the competition with other special interest groups) does not amount to saying that the white race is superior (are you following?). One must actually say that the white race is superior to be a white supremacist (this is what the word means; look it up in a dictionary). Quite as one must actually deny the Holocaust to be a Holocaust denier.

However. Guilt-ridden liberals (seeing white people as the cancer of history), and many people of other races/cultures (who indeed faced a lot of violence from "whites"), fear "the white race" so much, that even the slightest tendency for affirmation of our identity (which is most often not stated as "us whites" but as "us Italians", "us Westerners" or similar) is seen as the worst threat they can imagine. The only way to please these sentiments is to ensure white people's emasculation and even gradual eradication (by ethnic cleansing); which is currently being implemented.

Being surrounded by liberals, when I state that there comes a point where we actually have to focus on defending and care for our own country and people, the answer I normally get is "Why do you think we are better than them?". I then answer that I do not think we are better than "them". In some cases "them" is better than us, but ours is ours, that's the point. And this is a point that liberals fully understand for any people of the world, no problem, except if these people happen to have white skin. People with white skin do not have these rights according to liberals. So because we are "white" we have to be overrun my mass immigration (the demographic effects of which will make the original population a minority in half a century in many Western countries). We do not have the right to our own land, because we are not "better than them". And even if we had been, we would have no right anyway.

Unknown said...

I'll help you out with your elipsis:

us: "eignee Volk erst!"; "Europa aan dee Europeanen"
them: white power, neo-nazi.

So who are these "hatemongers" you are talking about and what is wrong with them? Their ideas or methods or both?

What evidence is there that the stylized cross has a long Flemish tradition?

I'm not trying to dictate what you can display, I'm just point out the obvious fact that the cross in question is a "white pride" symbol.

Ernest said...

David said:
Are you people mentally challeged or are you trying to put one over us?

"You people"? Oh shades of Ross Perot!

Alexis said...


Do you reject the American flag or not?

Remember, the Ku Klux Klan has used the American flag.

AngleofRepose said...

Captain obtuse says: "I'm just point out the obvious fact that the cross in question is a "white pride" symbol."

Captain obvious says: "No sh*t, Sherlock! It's also a Celtic Cross."

Captain obtuse says: "What evidence is there that the stylized cross has a long Flemish tradition?"

Captain obvious says: "...


Conservative Swede said...

David has a problem with "eignee Volk erst!" or "Own people first" since he thinks that a people does not have the right to self-preservation, because that would mean that they are supremacist and think they are better than others. Therefore e.g the Indians in America or the Tibetans have no right to self-preservation or to look after the interests of their ethnic group.

Oh no, I forgot. David always applies a racial aspect on this. So it's only the people that he perceive as "white", that has no right to self-preservation. However, the definition of "white" is rather unclear. So let me ask you David:

Georgians, do they have the right to self-preservation?

The Finns are not Caucasians, is it OK for them with self-preservation?

The Jews?

Could you clarify this for us? I'm sure that you are OK with the Tibetans and the red Indians, while not with the Flemish. But what about these other groups?

Conservative Swede said...


A stylized version of the Celtic cross is simply a stylized version. Humans like stylized design.

E.g. this gravestone looks like what Dewinter has got in his bookshelf. This doesn't prove anything about what Dewinter sees in his cross. To reach certainty about that, we'll need to peek into David's mind... sorry I meant Dewinter's mind.

Anyway, my point is we should not get hysterical merely over a symbol. We should not jump to conclusions about symbols with virtually no knowledge about the cultural context. Read this. Look at the ring in the picture. The way the Swastika is stylized you already know it's a Nazi symbol, don't you? Now read the text at the link.

The whole thing gets particularly hysterical when you and Charles Johnson judge the whole thing only based on looking at photos, interpreting symbols. While willfully ignoring everything else: political action and statements etc.

Of course, as has been shown, you are not OK with any European people defending and caring for their country and people. So this is the real issue, not crosses. Western Europe is overrun by cultural suicide, mass immigration and demographic Jihad, and you think that those that as a consequence want to defend their countries are evil. What do you want them to defend? Liberal universalism and the European Union?

Unknown said...

Contrary to what you might think, I actually DO think that the idea of self-determination is problematic, and not just in a European context. For the "self" in "self-determination" is not as easy to define as Wilson had thought when he recommended the idea after WWI. And it is not surprising that Hitler should have picked up on the idea when making a case for defending ethnic Germans by annexing the Sudentenland. But again, that is a debate for another occasion.

Back to the cross: I don't care what name you give it. "White pride" types call it a Celtic Cross, so I have no problems with that.

Angel linked to the google image search for Celtic Cross. Here's a test. Scroll through the various google pages until you find a cross that actually looks like the simple stylized cross at issue. (The fact that there are so few does suggest to me that the name celtic cross is a bit misleading.)

Try to be honest in identifying the ones that look the same. Remember: no filigree; it must be a plus sign: not a crucifix, and not tapering in width toward the middle.

What did you find? What kinds of webpages are those? What other symbols are located on the same pages?

X said...

ConSwede already gave you a very good example of a stylised solar cross without any racist connotations whatsoever. I suspect you're simply not reading properly.

Hey David, am I a racist or not? I need to know!

CarnackiUK said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Conservative Swede said...


Contrary to what you might think, I actually DO think that the idea of self-determination is problematic, and not just in a European context.

This puts you in a pretty marginal position. What are you looking for? World government?

Regarding crosses, Odin's cross of Celtic crosses, the ornamental style is by far the most common on grave yards, that seems clear. But the stylized version is the most common in other contexts, such as beer coasters (see CVF) or songbooks (see LGF), and apparently in bookshelves. It's the same symbol, however, in either case. To know how to interpret the symbol we need more context. E.g. to interpret what the symbol means on the cover of a songbook, I would want to have a look at the songs in the book. Just saying "Look a songbook with an evil symbol - boo!" doesn't buy much. This is the very definition of being superstitious.

Conservative Swede said...

Speaking of superstition and different styles of crosses:

What would you think of someone walking around in this, David?

It's an interesting question, you must admit.

Unknown said...

CarnackiUK has the best cross so far, but it is still tapering toward the middle. More importantly: there is no doubt that there is a tradition of using the cross as Christian symbol, as on grave stones and memorials. But the stylized cross has a very distinctive look. The real question is: if you were to show the stylized cross to a sample of Flemsish people would they recognize it as a symbol of flemish nationalism from the 1910s or earlier, or would they recognize it as the white pride symbol that is used throughout Europe? Finding a couple celtic crosses in a flemish context does not show that it is part of the national consciousness as a national symbol. Moreover, since the cross is anyway used on graves, its presence there is hardly surprising: it is just a variation on a tradition grave marker. Its use as a political symbol, however is intimate ties to the white pride movement (which commentors here don't seem to have much of a problem with any more than with swastikas).

I don't know what CVF is.

AngleofRepose said...

OK, I can see your point David, but perhaps it's just a different/Dewinter version of this.

It's not for me to say what that symbol means to Dewinter, but I have a hard time believing it means one thing only - White pride. But if it does - does White pride automatically equate with racist?

For example, some members of La Raza are clearly racist, yet I'm betting there are other members who are simply proud of their race & culture. I don't have a problem with the that, as long as they ain't hatin on whitey.

Same goes for Dewinter. I don't have a problem with race & cultural pride and as long as he doesn't condone discrimination w/in the party platform, I'll continue to support him.

CarnackiUK said...

would they recognize it as the white pride symbol that is used throughout Europe?

Ha! Yes, the streets are positively swarming with Nazis with exotic armbands! Hate to rain on your Nuremberg parade, David, but I've never even heard the term 'white pride' in any country outside of the US. That whole White Pride schtick is intrinsically American, a reaction and mirror image, I suspect, to the Black Power movement. There is no equivalent in the UK for instance of the Aryan Brotherhood. Here we only have the Muslim Brotherhood to contend with.

Anyway, I can't access it myself right now - I did earlier - but see what you make of the first poem here -

It's in Flemish, but you don't have to read it, just look at it and see what it suggests....

AngleofRepose said...


Conservative Swede said...

No Angle,

These are not at all like the stylized WN crosses. They are standing on foots, and they are brown, and they have too many decorations (that 3D effect e.g.),...

... and maybe they are WN crosses after all. How devious to paint them brown and sell them as Celtic crosses. That must be one of the dangerous supremacists from VB...

This doesn't prove anything! It's just a photo! Take it away!

AngleofRepose said...


Hehehe. Found that just by googling "crosses".

Do me a favor? Email me @

I'd like to discuss this further via email rather than on Baron's dime.

Unknown said...

The "flemish cross" flag appears to be a local version of the red cross; hence the flemish colors with the apolitical cross indicating the medical association. Kind of like the "red crescent" or "red mogen dovid" symbols, except with the color changed rather than the figure.

OK, so your roof cross (the one on the right) is pretty similar. But you had to look pretty hard to find it! More importantly, there are many, many, many (that's 3 "manys") examples of crosses that ARE exactly the same as the stylized cross at issue (in the way that ConsSwede mocks)and all of THOSE crosses ARE connected with some kind of white power or white pride group. Besides, even if you could find one or two examples of a perfectly identical cross, it would not prove anything: it is easy to imagine that someone who is authentically ignorant of its racist connotations would use the identical stylized cross thinking that it looked neat.

Contrary to carnackiuk's suggestion, some of his UK compatriots do use the cross (not a similar one, but an identical one) for their own political statement associated with "white power" or "white nationalism." (Or was it just the word "power" that he thought was uniquely American? I don't see an important difference.) I used to live in Germany and noticed the trend of having "white power" (in English!) on clothing along, of course, with the stylized cross at issue. It's also not true that European ethnic identity parties are all nation-specific. Hitler wanted a pan-Europe racial-based state since the "Aryans" were not specific to a certain border. The cross is similiarly used internationally.

Baron Bodissey said...

CarnackiUK --

Please don't paste long URLs into the comments; they make the post page too wide and mess up the appearance of the permalink page.

Use link tags; the instructions are at the top of the full post's comment section.


CarnackiUK said...


How bout this one:

a memorial to Flemish casualties in WW1....


Damn Nazis!

Unknown said...


We've already seen that one. The arms of the cross flair out at the end, which is typical for the traditional celtic cross. Plus, as I already noted, using a cross as burial symbol is pretty universal in Christian countries. There's no evidence that it is a flemish symbol as opposed to simply a cross at a burial site.

Contrary to CUk's suggestion the stylized celtic cross in question is used throughout Europe and in North America as a white power symbol. So when the Anti-Fa group wanted to depict themselves smashing fascism, they did it

This way. They did this because everyone everyone knows what the stylized celtic cross means: that you are a neo-fascist white pride sort of person.

CarnackiUK said...

Please don't paste long URLs into the comments; they make the post page too wide and mess up the appearance of the permalink page.

Baron, apologies for that. On some blogs text URLs automatically show up as links and I was complacently expecting that to happen.

CarnackiUK said...

David said:
(Or was it just the word "power" that he thought was uniquely American? I don't see an important difference.)
Actually, what I said was that I had never heard the term 'white pride' - which you use a lot - outside of the US. It has that overemphatic earnestness about it that just sounds so 'American' to the British ear.

Same goes for that UK group you linked to, the White Patriots. I've never even heard of it, and I'm willing to bet that membership doesn't extend much beyond that guy's immediate family. The very name, White Patriots, is a giveaway that it takes its ideological inspiration from US racists rather than from, say, Nazi Germany.

Did you check out the link I suggested -
Ijzer Tower ? Notice the shape of the poem and also the photo at top left which shows a huge plus sign type cross atop the tower. The Ijzer Tower, built on the site of a bloody WW1 battle, houses the desecrated celtic cross headstones of Flemish war dead and has become the epicenter of the Flemish independence movement (hence the importance of the celtic cross motif to this devoutly Roman Catholic community.) Each August thousands of Flemings make an emotional pilgrimage (it uses that word on the website) to the Tower to honor their war dead and demonstrate their support for Flemish independence. The website describes it as the largest annual PEACE rally in Europe!

I've come to agree with Archonix that nothing said here is going to change your default mindset that 'Celtic Cross = neo-Nazis", so here's a suggestion: if you're sincere about wanting to find out the truth on this, why don't you go along yourself next August and ask the Ijzer pilgrims what the significance of the 'Heldenhuldezerkjes'/Celtic Cross is to them? That's the only way you're ever going to satisfy your own suspicions.

That's all I have to say on this.

CarnackiUK said...

Okay, that link didn't work.

Here goes again:

Ijzer Tower

Click on 'Poezie' in the menu.

ProFlandria said...


"You've got to be kidding me! Are you people mentally challeged or are you trying to put one over us?"

Simmer down...

"[...]'I don't hate black people, I just love my own white people' is an old KKK and white power claim from American racists. If you can't tell that that claim is racist, then you are a moron."

A little exercise: "Black pride" is a term that is frequently bandied about in verious iterations, such as "proud Black man", "Nubian Queen", etc. The context is always one of preference over others. Tell me, is this racist? If you deny it is, does that make you a moron? Careful now...

" To me, it's obvious that loving your own white people is a racist attitude."

Therefore, the only way to avoid your "racist" label is to hate "your own white people". Your argument is only ever made against whites, not against any other racial group. On the contrary, that same attitude is encouraged in other "races". For crying out loud, we can't even get one politician in the US to say that La Raza is a racist organisation ("Por La Raza Todo. Fuera La Raza Nada" - Everything for the Race - Nothing outside the Race). Your argument is racist against whites. And don't even try that "only whites can be racists" line - that may work on pimply college kids, but I've been around the block a few times.

"I actually DO think that the idea of self-determination is problematic, and not just in a European context."

This is an opinion that merits further discussion. For now though, let me reply by saying that self-determination [of peoples] is a valuable principle especially in the European context. The "peoples" in question - the Bretons in France, the Flemish in Belgium, and the Irish - easily self-identified because of their second-class status in the nations they inhabit. In the case of Flanders, the situation is even more stark: a majority that has "enjoyed" second-class status since the creation of its host nation, subject to a form of government that is engineered to keep them there. I would posit that the lack of self-determination is a greater source of friction than its actualisation would be.

"There's no evidence that it is a flemish symbol as opposed to simply a cross at a burial site."

When you refer to the WW1 grave markers, consider (from the post at top): " is not the design of the headstone’s Cross that determines the Flemish nationalist “content”, but the inscriptions upon it. [...] the basic shape appears to have been unremarkable in its use as a burial symbol [...]. However, by adding the Flemish nationalism-inspired inscriptions the complete design became a symbol for the movement. When the Service for Military Gravestones crushed more than half — over 500 — to build a gravel road in 1925 their symbolic power would only have increased."

Symbols are funny things. The celtic cross is the basic motif for the grave marker design; a nationalist message is added. The government reacts "unfavorably" by destroying many of the grave markers. Not just the inscription, mind you - the entire thing. The destroyed artifact becomes a symbol, as some of the Yser Tower memorials attest (the flat grave markers are recreations with the area for inscription filled in with rubble to symbolize the destroyed markers) - and symbols are at their best when they are simple. We come almost full circle from cross as (Christian) symbol, to grave marker, to nationalist symbol, and via destruction back to the cross as (nationalist) symbol.

Your question to Archonix, "Fess up: do you believe that european culture cannot be separated from racial background? That therefore the white RACE (and not just european culture) needs to be defended?"

I would answer "no". (full disclosure - in my last year as a Belgian citizen I voted VB for the first time). I think that Europeans who can legitimately claim "white racial purity" are a minority. My family has a hispanic strain that pops up every other generation - likely some Spanish soldier got frisky with a local wench during the siege of Oostende in 1600-1604. Those are some tenacious genes right there! And then there's the Spanish-Arab-Berber concoction, and the Slav-Arab mix, and... I could go on. Europe is no more uniformly "white" than African-Americans are uniformly "African". Millenia of warfare and migration provided a fair amount of cross-pollenation.

To answer your question more fully, European culture is not determined by skin color but by a common heritage. Hellenistic and Roman civilization, Christianity, Judaism, Reformation and Enlightenment all provided elements of societal organization and philosophy that frame a sense of "culture".

AngleofRepose said...

Well I'm done with the Odin/Celtic cross discussion David.

However, I'd like to point out that yes, it took some digging on my part to find that picture using the search term "crosses", but the order in which images appear doesn't mean jack sh*t to me. A person finds partial sentences like "Lee Bong-ju of South Korea crosses ..." in reference to a guy crossing the finish line, or "... a Black Cat Crosses Your Path" etc etc, which hinders a persons image search. So take THAT argument and stuff it.

Unknown said...

ProFlandria has the best response so far. (And I do think that I have simmered down.)

1) It is false that the only way to avoid being called a racist is to hate white people. The color of someone's skin is of no concern to me, whether to love or to hate. That dichotonomy assumes that white people form some kind of racial community which seems false to me (and racialist). The people who do hate whites (e.g. Nation of Islam) really are racists of course. I object to the idea that there is some meaningful grouping called "the white race." And yes, La Raza is also racist in my view.

2) I don't dispute the usefulness of the idea of self-determination in the context of groups that are oppressed or marginalized. That was Wilson's original idea with respect to colonized peoples. It should be treated pragmatically not in an "essentialist" way such that there is some universal principle of self-determination which requires that the world be split up into ethnic groups. The split between Flanders, Holland, and Friesia, for example, seems to be due to historical contingencies rather than ethnic identities. Friesians are the same "nationality" as Bavarians, but different than Dutch.

3) I would buy the WWI memorial argument if, for example, VB also used a more faithful rendition of the memorial in their literature. There is nothing difficult about reproducing that figure. And as the post mentions, it is not so much the unremarkable figure, but rather the inscription that makes the memorial specifically flemish. So why use only the figure (and a merely similar one at that) with no inscription? Why instead use one that has a demonstrable connection to racist and neo-fascist groups? I think it is obvious that neo-fascists use the stylized cross at issue because, in its stylized form, it looks quite like a nazi swastika: usually black, very "blocky" with the "motion" being provided by the circle rather than the hooks on the arms. Since the swastika is often banned, it is a useful replacement for them. Also, some people might object to the swastika because it is the symbol of the people who bombed london or whom grandpa was fighting against in WWII. The cross thus will not risk offending some erstwhile brothers in fascism, while still having the powerful and menacing echo of the nazi swastika. Of course some people here think the swastika is just fine; after all, you can hunt down non-fascist versions of each.

Indeed, the ridiculous spectacle of searching through countless crosses of neo-fascists that are EXACTLY like the one VB is using in order to find a handful of EXTREMELY SIMILAR ONES that are not neo-fascist in origin is similar to hunting down those quotes in the Koran about the "higher" jihad. "See! I can say that I'm making jihad on you: it doesn't mean anything bad! Look at this quote about better myself through jihad! Islam is a religion of peace! Some crazies have hijacked the meaning of the word jihad!" In fact, if you say "jihad!", that has a certain meaning ; and so does the blocky stylized celtic cross. It is insufficient to say that there are some exceptions. Then again . . . if you think swastikas are OK, it's hard to know where to find any common ground at all. Having that cross on your literature and your shelf is basically giving a middle finger to all the people who have been attacked or killed by racist skinheads--not to mention those killed under the banner of that other similar symbol. "So he gives them a middle finger. The middle finger has lots of different interpretations. Maybe he was just pushing his glasses up his nose."

4) I'm glad you are rejecting racial essentialism. But: what about those in VB and those you are defending? And: are you saying that there is some racial elbow room for some mixtures or that race doesn't really enter into it? The mayor of Vienna during the NS time famously said "I decide who is a Jew." Who decides who is Flemish or European?

5) I notice that AoR is done arguing with a troll like me for a second time.

Nemesis6 said...

Let's make some common sense: If you censor peoples' opinions because you don't agree with them, you're an insecure idiot, whatever your political affiliation. If it takes that much to rattle your proverbial political cage, perhaps you shouldn't allow comments.

So in nutshell - You can support racists as long as they share a big part of your political goals...

You know what, I'm gonna enlighten you on an organisation that is such a mirror reflection of these guys: Dansk Front they're called(Danish Front). They are known for their racist attitudes, and skinhead members, yet when their members praise the führer with the stretched hand, their spokesman "apologizes" for it, even though he is no different? Why does he do this if he agrees? The answer is simple: To attract more moderates, because there are moderates who are stupid enough to view an apology sufficient when it comes to praising Hitler and "racial purity". You see, in essence, denying that they are Nazis is the way to go for these people. It will bring them more members, and give them a bigger platform to reach their audience if they're not decried as what they are: A mixture of ignorant right-wingers and neo-nazis. I've actually mentioned this to members of the group on Youtube - There was no response, only a negative rating on my comment, which brings me back to my previous post which is now deleted for decrying confused right-wingers and Nazis.

Heil H... I mean, I support my country! Denmark forever! Victory to the Aryan r---- Victory to those who are against Islamization.

See, once again, this is a characteristic of the Nazis: They align themselves to whatever's moderate and closest to their racist bullshit, and it basically destroys the reputation of these noble causes, mainly the opposition to Islamonazism, and to some extent, nationalism. Notice the nationalism part, at that point, we have be on the right side of politics or the extreme right, because the Nazis know that nationalism is appealing to some people.

Nemesis6 said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Baron Bodissey said...

Gates of Vienna's rules about comments require that they be civil, temperate, on-topic, and show decorum. Your comment violated the first and last of these rules This is why I deleted it.

laller said...


I thought Dansk Front disbanded? Hard for their members to praise the fuhrer, when there's no organisation anymore? I also doubt they actually attracted ANY "moderates". All the images and vid clips I've seen of Dansk Front rallies show only nazis appearing...
Hell, even during the Mo-toons affair, they were the only ones organizing "Pro Free Speech" rallies, and yet only nazis appeared. If they couldn't get those "ignorant right-wingers" to show their support then, then I seriously doubt they ever had any "ignorant right-winger" support.

Unknown said...

I don't understand your worry. Why is any apology needed? The so-called Hitler's salute is part of our European Heritage, from Rome, the very birthplace of our civilzation. Or don't you know anything about your own history? Just because some hatemongers from the 1930's and 1940's used it does not make it a sign of hate. So what if some Danes use it too? Are you going to let some liberals who are offended by the salute tell us what salutes we can and can't use just because they are overly sensitive and do not have a proper understanding of history? That is just the typical leftwing PC BS and guilt by association with which some people are trying to trap VB.

Conservative Swede said...


If you spent less time studying symbols and salutes, and more time studying the opinions of an organization, thing should become less confusing for you.

Comparing Dansk Front and VB is like night and day. Dansk Front was the organization for those who were not welcome in, or left, or were excluded from, DPP. In Belgium there is National Front, and the relation between VB and NF is similiar to the once described between DPP and Dansk Front. The Nazis in Belgium hate VB, because of its pro-Israeli and pro-American stance. If you payed more attention to opinions, you would have found these relations too.

X said...

Oh you may think you're making a point, David, but the truth of the matter is that the salute in question does actually have a long history of use in other contexts. However, having said that, its primary use has generally been in an imperial context, from Imperial rome down through various other imperial revivalist movements of which the Nazi reich was just one such example. The use of that salute in a specifically non-authoritarian way in the US is an aberration, whereas in the case of the solar cross and sun wheel the use of the symbol in a fascist authoritarian environment is the aberration.

Or, lets look at it this way. Take much of the symbology of the United States and shear away its contextual trappings. Take away the flag, leave the eagles, the neo-classical design of government architecture (very popular with proto-fascist regimes in the 1930s - but then it was very popular everywhere in the 1930s and had been for quite some time), the symbology of the Great Seal of the President and so forth and then compare it to Nazi symbology. There are striking similarities.

Now, of course, you'll say, the United States stands for blah blah and so on but I didn't ask for that. I specifically mentioned stripping away the context. Without context a symbol is very easy to manipulate. Without context you can take the many eagle motifs in the symbols adopted by the United States and compare them to the similar eagle symbology in the nazi reich and declare that they are the same, and you can take any other symbology and delcare it means the US was and is a fascist state. Context is everything, my friend. Everything.

This examination of the supposed nazi links of Vlaams Belang and the solar cross lacked context. It divorced the symbols from any contextual environment and allowed illegitimate comparisons to be made. Within the context of Flemish history and VB's stated and enacted policies these crosses become innocuous. Harmless symbols of the Flemish fight for independence, and faith, and their dreams of liberty. Shorn of that context it is very easy to attribute their use to nazi leanings, because there is no contextual environment to prevent that association. However, shorn of context they are no longer relevant to the argument, because the context in which a symbol is viewed defines the meaning of that symbol.

It would do you well to bear this in mind so I shall repeat it again. Context is everything.

Nemesis6 said...

David, that only liberals find it disturbing is just ignorant of reality. Do it in public and you're just as likely to get a left hook as a right one, if you'll pardon the admittedly very fitting pun. This is not something I should have to explain to you. By the way, David, I encountered that kind of logic with neo-nazis - That their symbols, etc, date back to before Nazism, and frankly, it means squat. Part of our heritage? Yeah, also part of that other part of our heritage where we destroyed someone else's. Which one are you gonna pick? You know what's ironic? "For Our Heritage & Freedom!"
Who said the above? David Duke did.

Laller, that organisation does have people who are in the dark about their true motives, just like this whole VB thing, and in both cases, it's a sad spectacle to watch someone defend either of 'em. As far as if they're still around technically, I don't know, but their members sure flaunt that is it.

There's just so much evidence to prove that these VB guys are disgusting. And what does it matter where their symbols come from? When you're at that level of discussion, meaning nitpicking at this level, you're licked and you most likely know it, but you're going down in a pathetic fight.

In closing - Don't side with the people with no hair, because there's a reason they don't have it, and when people start talking about a "white Europe" or "white" anything, run like hell - DON'T. DEFEND. THEM.

Unknown said...

Yes, context. That is exactly what I have been saying all along. You are looking only at the context that suits you.

Here's some context:

1) US national symbols and the architecture you are talking about were not influenced by Nazi versions of same. It is a question of chronology.

2) The cross in question has a causal history running directly though hate groups as a substitute swastika. It has a very distinctive look. And the VB itself has a certain history that the ADL would consider the "other trappings of extremism" such as the appeal to ethnicity (identity, not hate!) in their party platform. This is the context.

I did not say or imply that the VB are "as bad as" Dansk Front (Denmark den Danen!). I was only trying to show something of the ridiculous nature of the style of argument being used. It is not a question of autochthonous symbols being "hijacked" here. It is a question of a far right party trying to get supporters from the even farer right.

3) The context includes not just VB and its history, but European political culture, especially the culture of the far right, whether sophisticated and organized or just some football hooligans looking for an excuse to attack innocent people. In that context the cross has has a well-established and understood meaning, and it is that essential context that you choose to ignore. You admit that 99.99% of similar crosses are linked with white racist groups (the roof cross is the best, but it is not identical and it is not a political symbol). You admit that there are tons of examples of absolutely identical crosses used by the white racists, but I have yet to see an absolutely identical cross used for some other purpose, even a non-political one. That is the case even though a couple such cases would not make a difference to the overall cultural meaning of the symbol. VB would be the first ones to use the symbol without a racist meaning--even though they find common cause on many issue with racists.

This is the context that I find relevant.

The war memorial argument is your best hope. It does not ridiculous in the way the roof-top-cross argument is. But I find the war memorial irrelevant since the VB chose not to use a reproduction of the memorial with letters in it. That would have made a very powerful image, I would think, that is recognizably flemish. Instead they chose the cross that is, on the most charitible interpretation, an attempt to pander to racists. But that charity of interpretation does not seem to be earned due to the context: the history and racial politics of VB (identity not racism!--but wink wink). So the context is that you have a party battling charges of racism and nazi sympathies that uses the leading racist symbol going today. As far as I can tell, the claim that the stylized cross evolved out of the war memorial is pure speculation.

Am i repeating myself? OK, I'm done.

X said...

US national symbols and the architecture you are talking about were not influenced by Nazi versions of same. It is a question of chronology.

Ditto the flemish cross. Remember, context... as I said, if you shear away the context of the United States' history and only look at the symbology, the "wider" context of the Imperial roman influence on both the fascists and the United States, then you will inevitably make a connection with fascism.

The rest of your argument is variations of the theme. You remove the relevant context and try to examine the symbols in the "wider" context, incidentally ignoring the very thing that demonstrates the invalidity of your argument. I am not ignoring this "wider" context, I am simply pointing out that the wider context has no bearing on the more immediate context of flemish history.

Nobody, nopbody agrees that 99% of solar crosses have a fascist connection. In fact the majority of solar crosses have no relation or bearing on the argument as they are in some cases thousands of years old. If you saw a solar cross within the context of a hindu vedic temple in northern India you wouldn't call them nazis, would you? Of course you wouldn't! The solar cross has a history completely independent of fascism there! Yet when that same solar cross makes an appearance in another place, where it has a history completely independent of fascism, you dismiss the context and try to bring in the "wider" context of the use of a similar symbol in recent fascist movements. Why not bring in that same "wider" context in the case of the vedic temple? At least then you'd be consistent.

Unknown said...

1) The chronology in the present case is that the stylized cross is being used right at the very moment when the same symbol is in its most widespread use as a hate symbol. Can't you see that that is different from the US? Yes, that chronology is not sufficient evidence by itself that there is also a causal relationship. But there is other evidence for that.

2) Arch: Nobody, nopbody agrees that 99% of solar crosses have a fascist connection. In fact the majority of solar crosses have no relation or bearing on the argument as they are in some cases thousands of years old. The roof-top-cross argument seemed to concede that 99.99% of identical crosses are used by racists. Your claim to be unable to find a difference between the blocky stylized cross and other crosses is intellectually dishonest or self-delusional.

3)The same goes for your claim about the vedic temple. That is the ridiculous argument I ridiculed in post with respect to the roman salute and the word "jihad." It is the argument that would excuse the use of a swastika. (Are you sure you want to say that a swastika on DeWinter's shelf would be OK?) In the context of a vedic temple, I would not think a swastika or a solar cross is a racist symbol. In the context of European political party that itself fits into a certain context (personal and political history along with present party platform), other conclusions are warranted--at least prima facie. When you ask people to "only look at the symbology," then you are explicitly asking them to divorce the symbology from any meaningful context. It is like asking to think about what a word means without asking what role the word plays in a certain language. Under those conditions, you can say it means whatever you like. The context of fascism obviously does not apply to the temple case. But it obviously does apply to the case of a far right political party. or indeed in Europe generally if we consider its very distinctive look. which is different from the temple's crosses and from crosses produced by actual celts and from the war memorial.

4) The war memorial argument has some prima facie plausibility precisely since it tries to find the proper context rather than ignoring all context. But the argument seems plausible only so long as we ignore the wider context of the well-established cultural meaning of the blocky stylized celtic cross. Yes the war memorial is a national symbol of flanders. And yes, nationalists use representations of the original memorial. But the war memorial argument would ask us to believe that when VB wanted to use this flemish symbolism, they stripped it of precisely the elements that would allow us to place it in its flemish context and instead used a version of the symbol that is indistinguishable from the cross used by white racists world wide and is also used by other flemish groups that do explicitly make common cause with those racists. And they did this even though (more context coming...) the VB and its members have their own history and so forth would raise certain suspicions (admittedly just suspicions) about their fascism quite apart from any symbolism.

5) Further context in which the war memorial argument must be understood is this: that there has also been a use of the the othala rune" associated with VB. The block cross and that rune are often seen together in the same racist context. Even if the war memorial argument can be considered "successful" when isolated from this context, it is considerably weakened by the fact that no analogous argument is available for the rune. So here you will ultimately have to appeal to a roof-top-cross type of argument, made all the more implausible by presence of more than one sign of neo-fascism.

Unknown said...

I notice now that more has been added to the original post:

It is understandable that Bretons should use a celtic cross since they are celts. Moreover, the cross on the flag does not have the same distinctive look as the white identity cross. I linked to the flag with the cross in a previous post. In addition, this one example is hardly evidence for the claim that it is "used historically as a symbol for nationalism."

Alexis said...

World War I was a traumatic event. It was also a time of cultural transfer of ideas. The Celtic Cross, being used for the graves of Celtic soldiers in Flanders, was adopted by Belgians. In particular, it became a cultural adoption of Flemish nationalists. The key question is whether Flemish nationalism's adoption of the Celtic Cross as its own symbol since World War I trumps its use by racists within the past forty years.

If the Celtic Cross were truly a white power symbol, the Scottish memorial at the site of the Battle of Passchendale would be enormously crass and culturally insensitive, for even though it is clearly a Celtic memorial, it is planted within a Flemish geographical context.

There is ample reason to regard Flemish adoption of the Celtic Cross as its symbol to date from World War I, which predates later neo-Nazi adoption of the symbol. Has anyone bothered to ask the Scottish government if Flemish adoption of the Celtic Cross is racist or offensive? I would be intrigued by the answer one would receive.

Unknown said...

Alexis said "The key question is whether Flemish nationalism's adoption of the Celtic Cross as its own symbol since World War I trumps its use by racists within the past forty years.

You are assuming that there is one uniform thing called a "celtic cross." Remember that crosses are used on graveyards. And remember that there are celtic crosses and then there are blocky non-swastika celtic crosses. Remember that the example of the flemish national symbol was both a memorial for the dead and had a distinctively different look and is distinguished from generic memorial for the dead by the inscription rather than the form.

I don't see any pictures of the Scottsh memorial. But I have a pretty good idea that it looks a bit different from the blocky non-swastika cross. I know this without having to see it. Do you honestly think that it might be confused for the the blocky non-swastika? I'm not begging the question, just making a well-grounded guess about what it looks like based on the common sense observation that the blocky non-swastika is pretty distinctive in appearance.

I'm not offended a celtic cross being used in a scottish memorial. Does that mean that I'm being inconsistent? No, it means I'm a reasonable person who can distinguish two similiar-looking things that have a different cultural meaning.

Unknown said...

This thread is obviously dead, but I don't have the self-restraint to resist offering a couple of final comments on this whole debate:

I wonder if anyone has asked DeWinter and co. what they think about the celtic cross. There's just no way that he would try to make the war memorial argument. It's too far-fetched. I do have a pretty good idea of what he would say: "We can't control what symbols our members choose to display and we have a lot of different kinds of supporters; there is justifiable anger out there and it is not surprising that it finds expression in symbols associated with defending European identity, but the VB does not officially support the use of this symbol; the cross on my shelf was a gift from a friend of mine, and I display it in honor and loyalty to my friendship, not because I am a white power supporter; and in fact the meaning of the symbol is somewhat ambiguous and we can take it to mean identity rather than racism even if some unsophisticated people don't know the difference." I suppose it would satisfy those looking for some reason to excuse the presence of the blocky non-swastika cross. But the supporters of the war memorial argument would then have a real dilemma on their hands: they would have to back off their claims in order to appear to have at least some connection to reality; but then it would be obvious that the war memorial argument was just a rationalization all along.

Well, we could ask Rob Verreycken, Vlaams Belang representative in the Flemish parliament from 2004-2006: "Ik ken die vlaggen met het Keltisch kruis echt wel en ik heb geen probleem met White Power. Het betekent simpelweg 'witte kracht' en het is gewoon de tegenhanger van Black Power. Ik sta liever voor de Vlaamse Leeuw, maar als de gelegenheid zich zou voordoen, dan zou ik er geen problemen mee hebben om voor de White Power-vlag te poseren" (" White Power eerst," De Morgen June 27, 2005) Note well the use of the English term "white power." Translating the first sentence: "I know those flags with the Celtic cross, and I really have no problem with White Power." Notice that he quite properly takes the significance of the celtic cross as a white power symbol to be common knowledge. He continues (striking a note similar to some commentors here): "It means simply 'White Power' and it's just the counterpart of Black Power. I prefer the Flemish Lion, but if the opportunity should arise, then I would not have a problem posing in front of the White Power flag."

There is no doubt that the "IJzer Cross" is an authentic Flemish national symbol. (I ignore the fact that the Ijzerbedevaart itself has been tainted with fascist links, encomia to the South Africa Apartheid regime, and so forth.) But there is no evidence at all that the stylized blocky cross has any relation whatsoever to the Ijzerkruis or to anything else specifically Flemish. That such a connection might exist never occured to Verreycken, who rightly sees it as a racial symbol not a national symbol.

Other Flemish right-wing groups use the celtic cross too. What is their explanation of it? Well, at least one group offers a long explanation, and they don't mention the Ijzerkruis:

Your defense of the VB is pure rationalization and has no relation to reality.

Conservative Swede said...


Your Dewinter quote is made up and has no relation to reality, unless he would and up saying exactly so.

It's pretty obvious the Dewinter is aware of the white power interpretation of the Celtic cross. However, since his whole life mission is based on resisting PC orthodoxy (as well as anti-Semitism), why shouldn't he make a point in showing civil disobedience to their mindset also in this case? (The PC crowd and the anti-Semites sharing the same world view on this one as so often otherwise). I think the whole thing is about reclaiming a symbol; a symbol that has traditionally been a good symbol for the Flemish, but was turned into something bad by French people in the '60s.

It would be interesting to hear Dewinter own comment to this. In my opinion, this whole debate could have waited until we had heard Dewinter's statement. By people are just so eager to know-it-all, even before there is anything to know about it.

More important things could have been discussed, but some people are just obsessed by rambling on about rats and crosses.

Unknown said...


Of course my imaged quote from DeWinter is made up. I thought it was clearly identified as a prediction, not a claim of fact. The prediction is that he would offer a combination of minimizing the significance of the cross together with a distancing from its use. The aim would be allowing people to retain their illusions about their being no racism involved with the VB without alienating the racists for whom the sign is a sign of solidarity. Of course it is also in line with those aims to say nothing at all on the matter. I probably should have refrained from that prediction since it is speculation, but my point was just that if he does weigh in, then I believe he will make you look foolish. Then again, I could be completely wrong.

You can repeat the chestnut about "reclaiming one's symbols" but no one has refuted any of my arguments that Izjer celtic cross cannot reasonably be considered the inspiration for the use by Flemish nationalist groups of the blocky stylized celtic cross, which was introduced via the US, hence associated with the English terms "white power" and the stormfront motto "white pride worldwide" or just "WPWW" (as seen here in a picture of stormfront contributer and VB friend Michiel Smit.) These are two different crosses, not two "interpretations" of one cross. That is the point I have argued for here without any attempt at a refutation that I can see. If you are going to stand behind the Izjer cross argument it should consist of something more than mere speculation.

The argument that he is using the cross to piss people off, is, like other arguments on this thread, an argument that would justify using the swastika. Why no swastika? If your answer appeals to the Izjer cross, then you need to shore up that argument first.

Unknown said...

... On the other hand, it seems that no one here minded the celtic cross before the Ijzer cross argument was introduced in this post. So you might ask yourself: would it make any difference at all to your impression of VB if the Ijzer cross argument never existed? If not, why bother making the argument?