I think the teacher acted correctly though. If one, in this modern day and age, in the Western world sees a swastika, it's more than likely to be connected to (Neo-) Nazis. Exhibiting symbols connected to this movement should not be condemned, especially not amongst young people in schools. I can't blame the teacher for not knowing the original meaning, simply (I think) because almost nobody knows; there is no valid reason to expect them to know it.
The point of fact is, we are in the modern day, in the werstern world, most of the people alive never experienced the power of the image, we only know it from what we are taught, and learn, IF at the same time as teaching it you give the meaning of the symbol in its full context, father then push that power, fear, evil and hatred onto another generation, you help them understand, the power and significance, BUT appreciate its overall significance to our civilisations entire history. Simply, a Christian is not taught to hate the Jewish, even though there is a long history of violence and hatred there.
I don't know what subject that teacher taught, but let's for the sake of argument say that he/she was a teacher of chemistry. He/she would have no business knowing what the swastika symbol originally meant; he/she would have to know how molecules are built up, how and why chemical reactions take place, and how to explain all about this to children; knowing the ancient meaning behind this symbol is not a requirement for the job, nor should it be.
Actually the Teacher was a History teacher, granted that doesnt mean they will know the history of everything, BUT that does mean when a child has a point of contention with something, then they should be open to the 'argument', allow the teen to have his POV put forth, and then, when everything is discussed, either accept his belief, or ask him to put the book away.
Surely, the Hindu meaning is the original, but nowadays far from the true meaning, at least here in the Western world. (Whether something like a "true" meaning exist at all is a subject for another time maybe.) A little comparison might be able to explain this argument fully. To stay with the topic of this board, let's discuss the character of Buffy. Originally, Kristy Swanson played Buffy, but most commonly the character is associated with Sarah Michelle Gellar. Surely, you don't want to argue that when we think of Buffy, we should think of Kristy rather than Sarah?
As much as i see your point, i must point out that i'm not asking for people to focus on one, what i think should happen is people acknowledge both histories. Both have great significance, one of peace, one of war. IF the Second World War was not a part of the national ciriculum, then fair enough, but as it stands, its a large part of it, thus the whole history should be. That gives people more knowledge on why such a symbol became so powerful, but also lends help to the idea that people wont be as scared of it.
before the nazis used it it wasn't a well known symbol. but as im part of a culture who used the symbol. we recognize change. i doubt you're a part of it.
you're so off. why dont you however try to find a linear discussion.
Prophecy Girl.....i mean this nicely....your talking out of your arse.
The symbol has been widely used in nearly every culture since almost the dawn of civilised man.. The Romans, the Greeks, the Phoenitians, The Celts, The Druids. The symbol was one of the most used by the whole of Europe for nearly a century before th Nazi Party adopted it, infact it was because it was so widely known that it was used.
One of the big movements, the Scouts, had it as a symbol
The US used it as a Insignia for flying squads
The US even matched it with there ultimate symbol, the flag,
Change is necessary to all, but so is recognition of history. If people start having a selective memory in regards to history, forgetting some remembering others, then so much of our heritage as a race of humans, will be lost.
And i hardly see the necessity for three bad rep points from you.
