I was asked once, a long time ago, if I felt the hammer and sickle symbol of the Communist Party (which was adopted by the USSR as part of its national flag) carried the same negative connotations with it as the swastika does from its association with the Nazis. At first, I didn't agree that the same connotation applied, but both Ryan and Jambo convinced me that to argue otherwise was to be inconsistent in my application of historical facts.
In regards to images of actual people, like Mao, or Che, or Stalin... yes, I feel they are every bit as tasteless and ignorant an emblem as wearing a Hitler image on your t-shirt or backpack. The same goes for Lenin or Marx, who (more than anyone else) were responsible for the organization and implementation of communist ideology over the last 150 years.
Jambo brought up a good point as we were talking last night, though... and it got me thinking. The contribution of the Russian people during WWII is undeniable and (probably) unmeasurable in its scope. If the image of Stalin or representations of the USSR and the Soviet government are too offensive to use in a wartime memorial setting, then what can we use to adequately represent the sacrifice and efforts made by the Russians during the war?
The Red Army has maintained (and continues to use in its "Russian" form) the five-pointed star as a symbol. Would this be an acceptable image to use in representing the Russian contributions to the over-all efforts of the ETO war? Where do "revisionist" views of tyrannical regimes end and a fair representation of historical facts begin?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment