I'd Rather Nazi this....

[Joe Guy]

Swastika display at River Park home angers neighbors

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (KCRA) —Three poster-sized displays complete with swastikas are up at a River Park home, angering some neighbors.

One is made to look like an American flag, but instead of stars, it shows a swastika.

Watch report: Swastikas at River Park home angers neighbors

"This is ridiculous," said Rick Reader, who lives nearby. "Seeing this is ridiculous. That’s crazy."

Neighbors told KCRA 3 on Tuesday they have asked the man behind the display to take it down, but he refuses.

"So, I went over one day and just said, '(The swastikas) kind of cross the line for this neighborhood,'" said one neighbor, who didn’t want to provide his name. "He called it his art and got very defensive about it."

Others in the area said the display is not art.

"How do I explain this to my little one?" asked Robbie Rose, who lives nearby. "I am all for freedom of speech, but this is just too much. I really do want to get out of my car and rip that down. But the only reason I don't (is) because I do believe in being a good American, and I do believe in freedom of speech."

The house, on Moddison Avenue in Sacramento, also has a statue made out of two-by-fours, and a Palestinian flag displayed.

KCRA 3 tried to ask the man behind the displays what they meant, but he refused to explain.

The president of the Jewish Federation of Sacramento said it's offensive.

"There is no more potent (of) a symbol of hatred than the swastika," said Barry Broad, who was appalled at the display. "It is a symbol of murder and genocide and tremendous sacrifice to eradicate Nazism from this planet."

People who live nearby called police Monday. The police department said officers were sent to the house, but there is nothing they can do.

source

[Gob]

"This is ridiculous," said Rick Reader, who lives nearby. "Seeing this is ridiculous. That’s crazy."

Well, that settles it then.

[MajGenl.Meade]

He's an artist... he's confused. He wanted to display swish stickers.

[Lord Jim]

In the interest of free speech and "artistic expression", I have a suggestion for a 20 ft X 20 ft billboard for the neighbor directly across the street from this garbanzo to put up facing his house:




Like the old saying goes, the antidote for bad speech is more speech...

[BoSoxGal]

[rubato]

Its all good.

While I don't agree with his sentiments I think a lot of good things have come out of it.

1) The neighbors talked with him about it and asked him to take them down. An appropriate, respectful way of expressing themselves.

2) It has stimulated discussion about what he means and about the limits of tolerance. The latter is a discussion we need to have often just so that we can be reminded of what our values are.

3) He has refused to take them down as is his legal right and he has refused to explain them as is it his right to express and to not express as he wishes.

4) There was no attempt to force him and the interviewees all said they respected it as his right.


yrs,
rubato

[wesw]

he is Charlie hebdo....

[Big RR]

Can't argue with that Jim. A good response to an idiot.

[Sue U]

The president of the Jewish Federation of Sacramento said it's offensive.

"There is no more potent (of) a symbol of hatred than the swastika," said Barry Broad, who was appalled at the display. "It is a symbol of murder and genocide and tremendous sacrifice to eradicate Nazism from this planet."

People who freak out over the use of a swastika in this kind of display need to chill themselves out and consider the context. This is not an advertisement for neo-Nazism or racism. Its meaning is quite clear and is exactly the opposite -- it's an obvious and heavy-handed suggestion that the policies of Israel and the United States, particularly with respect to Palestine and Palestinians, exemplify their own new kind of fascism.

I don't agree with the message, but I don't think it's offensive or even inappropriate. It's a political protest statement intended to be "provocative," although too unoriginal and already-done to actually be so.

[Lord Jim]

This is not an advertisement for neo-Nazism or racism. Its meaning is quite clear and is exactly the opposite -- it's an obvious and heavy-handed suggestion that the policies of Israel and the United States, particularly with respect to Palestine and Palestinians, exemplify their own new kind of fascism.

I was going to make the same point; the clue is the Palestinian flag, and what doesn't get mentioned in the news piece (probably because the reporter didn't know it) is that the other 2 posters besides the faux American flag are a grotesque parody of the Israeli flag (with the Star Of David replaced by the swastika)

This is a leftist thing, not a rightist thing...

However I strongly disagree with you about it not being "offensive". Portraying the US and Israel as the equivalent of the Nazis is highly offensive. (Not to mention an expression of staggering ignorance)

[Sue U]

However I strongly disagree with you about it not being "offensive". Portraying the US and Israel as the equivalent of the Nazis is highly offensive. (Not to mention an expression of staggering ignorance)

I find it too banal. YMMV. (You must be easily provoked.)

[MajGenl.Meade]

I think you're right, Sue. At first glimpse, the assumption is that displaying the swastika is intended to show that the householder supports Nazism/racism. But that feeling of justified offense should be moderated once the rather childish "art" motivation is realized.

The swastika replaces the star of David in position and colour on the Israeli flag. It is a visual representation of the commonplace, "how can you treat Palestinians as you do when you suffered the same kind of ethnic crimes in the past?" That same symbol is then transferred to the USian flag to show that support for Israel is also support for tactics associated to those of right wing extremism.

That being so, taking huge amounts of offense is rather an over-reaction. I don't think it's offensive to suggest moral equivalence between nasty things done by evil people and nasty things done by other people who should know better.

[RayThom]

"What's all the fuss about?" asked homeowner Sean McHitler.

[rubato]

I think you're right, Sue. At first glimpse, the assumption is that displaying the swastika is intended to show that the householder supports Nazism/racism. But that feeling of justified offense should be moderated once the rather childish "art" motivation is realized.

The swastika replaces the star of David in position and colour on the Israeli flag. It is a visual representation of the commonplace, "how can you treat Palestinians as you do when you suffered the same kind of ethnic crimes in the past?" That same symbol is then transferred to the USian flag to show that support for Israel is also support for tactics associated to those of right wing extremism.

That being so, taking huge amounts of offense is rather an over-reaction. I don't think it's offensive to suggest moral equivalence between nasty things done by evil people and nasty things done by other people who should know better.

Aparthied is a closer parallel to Israels treatment of the Palestinians than Nazism but it would be much more difficult to communicate that symbolically.


yrs,
rubato

[MajGenl.Meade]

That's true.

[TPFKA@W]

You really shouldn't go out of your way to piss off Jews, I mean they run everything. Keep them happy is the best policy.


Meanwhile I said to Ernie, my Favorite Jew of the moment why it is that none of the Jews I know, work with, or hang with are rich? I told him he was not living up to my stereotyped expectations. At least one of them ought to be dammit.

[Lord Jim]

The swastika replaces the star of David in position and colour on the Israeli flag. It is a visual representation of the commonplace, "how can you treat Palestinians as you do when you suffered the same kind of ethnic crimes in the past?" That same symbol is then transferred to the USian flag to show that support for Israel is also support for tactics associated to those of right wing extremism.

That being so, taking huge amounts of offense is rather an over-reaction. I don't think it's offensive to suggest moral equivalence between nasty things done by evil people and nasty things done by other people who should know better.

Oh brother...

indeed...

I really don't want to get into this with you again Gen'l, (First because I like you, and if we start to Tango about this, it's just gonna get nasty...and second, I've already posted before about the many, many differences between the historical dynamics of the Nazis and the Jews, versus the Israelis and the Palestinians...there's simply no rational comparison to be drawn... )

Also as I recall, you're the fellow who said that using enhanced interrogation techniques against a handful of terrorist leaders was morally worse then the murder of 3000 innocent people on 9/11...

So with all due respect, you ain't exactly my go-to guy when it comes to determining "moral equivalence"....

[wesw]

you gotta let speech that you detest be heard as well as speech you support. that s what makes it free. jim s response about putting up an opposing sign was spot on. now if the guy is trying to violently over throw us, then that s a problem. if he is just saying that we suck, it s his right.

[Joe Guy]

People who freak out over the use of a swastika in this kind of display need to chill themselves out and consider the context....

The problem with that display is that most people who see a swastika don't see past that and don't really care about the context. It doesn't matter what message he is trying to convey, what is important is how it is perceived.

[Lord Jim]

Here's how simple this gets...

If you have a point you want to make, but the point you want to make requires the use of a swastika to make it...

You might want to re-think the point you wanted to make...