True to form, fascists (and conservatives in general) are incapable of coming up with anything original or creative, so they even had to steal their symbols
The fasces was originally a symbol of Roman imperial authority and power. I’m not sure how it ever could have been a socialist or progressive symbol.
(Yes, I know the interpretation about the bundle of rods being stronger together - fascism is a collectivist ideology, just one with a distinctly narrowed definition of the collective - but trying to apply it to socialism just because it has collectivist themes ignores a) the history of the symbol, and b) THE BLOODY GREAT AXE IN THE MIDDLE KEEPING EVERYONE ELSE IN LINE).
The fasces was originally a symbol of Roman imperial authority and power. I’m not sure how it ever could have been a socialist or progressive symbol.
(Yes, I know the interpretation about the bundle of rods being stronger together - fascism is a collectivist ideology, just one with a distinctly narrowed definition of the collective - but trying to apply it to socialism just because it has collectivist themes ignores a) the history of the symbol, and b) THE BLOODY GREAT AXE IN THE MIDDLE KEEPING EVERYONE ELSE IN LINE).
Actually, the fasces predates the Imperial era of Rome, and is, indeed, less important and prominent in the Imperial era. The fasces is most strongly associated with the Republican era of Rome, when it was a symbol of magisterial power and authority, as opposed to arbitrary, personal, or royal authority (though it originates in the monarchy, there’s a long, LONG discussion that can be had there about the Roman monarchy and its unique attributes that would be a very winding aside, so let’s skip it for now). The bundling of the sticks represents the strength of the collective in imbuing power on the magistrate; the axe represents the power of life and death granted to magistrates by the people.
Obviously this is a bit more stark than symbols we prefer in the modern day - and rightly so. In the modern day, we don’t need to be reminded that authorities are granted power over us by our consent; we need to be reminded that the authorities are granted power over us by our consent. But the origins of it are very much republican and, while I would hesitate to say explicitly democratic, considering the structure of the Roman Republic, more democratic than authoritarian.
Funny enough, the sticks were the more prominent symbol of keeping people in line. The axe was used only for executions, which would have been exceptionally rare (the first execution with the fasces’ axe being used on those literally conspiring to restore the monarchy), while the sticks were used for corporal punishment, both subject to an appeal to the people before punishment.
For that reason, the fasces was widely used in republican movements in the 18th and 19th centuries, back when everyone was a Romaboo, and only rarely in monarchial movements outside of throwbacks like Napoleon.
Sorry, you are correct about it being a Republican, not Imperial symbol.
In everything else, you’re basically confirming what I said with additional detail. There’s no good reason why socialists should want to use a symbol whose underlying message is “Stand in line or we’ll beat you down.”
In everything else, you’re basically confirming what I said with additional detail. There’s no good reason why socialists should want to use a symbol whose underlying message is “Stand in line or we’ll beat you down.”
The underlying message, I would argue, is “This authority exercised in this place or by this person is granted by the people”, though, again, I agree that it’s not very useful a symbol in the modern day.
“ I’m still salty that fascists stole the fasces tbh”
Implies that PugJesus would have wanted to use the symbol to describe their ideology. And since PugJesus is on this community you can be pretty sure they are a leftist of some sort.
I think you took it one step too far… For example, I can say that I’m salty at the Nazis for stealing the swastika (which is true, btw, that shit pisses me off) without being a Buddhist or whatever
I don’t think that I would want it to describe my ideology, but I would like to be able to see it without thinking “Goddamn fascists, the lowest of all scum”, considering its long history without fascism. Sadly, the fascists have taken that from all of us.
Isn’t this generally true of everything? What ideological symbology doesn’t borrow authority from a predecessor? Which philosophy or ideology doesn’t stand on the shoulders of previous philosophers or cultures?
German Nazi symbology was, perhaps, more blatant about this, but then again, they were specifically appealing to the mass’ sense of heritage and racial pride which - by nature - has to be grounded in cultural symbols. Modern Nazi symbology calls back to German Nazi symbology because they idealize it, and a dog whistle is more effective when there is history behind it.
But, shit, Wiccanism and mysticism steals so heavily from the past it’s hard to claim originality in any of it.
I’m happy to hear counter-examples, though. I’m not dogmatic about this; it’s just that true originality is far, far more rare than borrowing just by the nature of humans and how we learn things.
Its not that others don’t borrow etc. To me, its that the far right just straight up steal everything because its not an ideology of idealism, despite the words they use. Its just an ideology of power and they use any method they can to get it. It doesn’t really stand for anything like, say, worker emancipation or the unity of human, spirit and nature which are the things you would draw from when making your own cultural identities.
You can’t really advertise, with a symbol, your policy being the will to dominate and expect positive results.
In fact, the far right ripped off everything associated with them. They very deliberately don’t set trends but follow them, as this best facilitates their aims. For example, original skinhead culture had nothing to do with the far right and was only meant as a way for working class to distinguish themselves from the hippies, who they saw as upper middle class.
Of course, everyone knows the “steal from one person is plagiarism but steal from many is research” line. My point here is that almost all of the others, to me, would fall under the “research” umbrella whereas the far right would all be under the latter. At least, thats how I see the difference.
They very deliberately don’t set trends but follow them, as this best facilitates their aims.
I have a theory about this.
I think some of it comes from religion, from being conditioned to believe in hierarchy, to believe someone knows better than you and is worth following, even if you don’t understand why. It’s faith. And you have to follow it; if you have proof, it’s no longer faith, it’s fact, and fact is somehow less. All the fascists do is replace religion with a cult of personality, but that desperate need to have someone to follow, someone who knows the answers, is very simian. I don’t know if we’ll ever entirely evolve out of it, even if we avoid extincting ourselves.
I’m still salty that fascists stole the fasces tbh
True to form, fascists (and conservatives in general) are incapable of coming up with anything original or creative, so they even had to steal their symbols
The fasces was originally a symbol of Roman imperial authority and power. I’m not sure how it ever could have been a socialist or progressive symbol.
(Yes, I know the interpretation about the bundle of rods being stronger together - fascism is a collectivist ideology, just one with a distinctly narrowed definition of the collective - but trying to apply it to socialism just because it has collectivist themes ignores a) the history of the symbol, and b) THE BLOODY GREAT AXE IN THE MIDDLE KEEPING EVERYONE ELSE IN LINE).
Actually, the fasces predates the Imperial era of Rome, and is, indeed, less important and prominent in the Imperial era. The fasces is most strongly associated with the Republican era of Rome, when it was a symbol of magisterial power and authority, as opposed to arbitrary, personal, or royal authority (though it originates in the monarchy, there’s a long, LONG discussion that can be had there about the Roman monarchy and its unique attributes that would be a very winding aside, so let’s skip it for now). The bundling of the sticks represents the strength of the collective in imbuing power on the magistrate; the axe represents the power of life and death granted to magistrates by the people.
Obviously this is a bit more stark than symbols we prefer in the modern day - and rightly so. In the modern day, we don’t need to be reminded that authorities are granted power over us by our consent; we need to be reminded that the authorities are granted power over us by our consent. But the origins of it are very much republican and, while I would hesitate to say explicitly democratic, considering the structure of the Roman Republic, more democratic than authoritarian.
Funny enough, the sticks were the more prominent symbol of keeping people in line. The axe was used only for executions, which would have been exceptionally rare (the first execution with the fasces’ axe being used on those literally conspiring to restore the monarchy), while the sticks were used for corporal punishment, both subject to an appeal to the people before punishment.
For that reason, the fasces was widely used in republican movements in the 18th and 19th centuries, back when everyone was a Romaboo, and only rarely in monarchial movements outside of throwbacks like Napoleon.
Sorry, you are correct about it being a Republican, not Imperial symbol.
In everything else, you’re basically confirming what I said with additional detail. There’s no good reason why socialists should want to use a symbol whose underlying message is “Stand in line or we’ll beat you down.”
The underlying message, I would argue, is “This authority exercised in this place or by this person is granted by the people”, though, again, I agree that it’s not very useful a symbol in the modern day.
Where did I say it could have been a socialist or a progressive symbol?
I think they were referring to PugJesus’s earlier comment.
Ok, where did PugJesus say it could have been a socialist or progressive symbol?
“ I’m still salty that fascists stole the fasces tbh”
Implies that PugJesus would have wanted to use the symbol to describe their ideology. And since PugJesus is on this community you can be pretty sure they are a leftist of some sort.
I think you took it one step too far… For example, I can say that I’m salty at the Nazis for stealing the swastika (which is true, btw, that shit pisses me off) without being a Buddhist or whatever
fair enough.
I don’t think that I would want it to describe my ideology, but I would like to be able to see it without thinking “Goddamn fascists, the lowest of all scum”, considering its long history without fascism. Sadly, the fascists have taken that from all of us.
thats fair
Isn’t this generally true of everything? What ideological symbology doesn’t borrow authority from a predecessor? Which philosophy or ideology doesn’t stand on the shoulders of previous philosophers or cultures?
German Nazi symbology was, perhaps, more blatant about this, but then again, they were specifically appealing to the mass’ sense of heritage and racial pride which - by nature - has to be grounded in cultural symbols. Modern Nazi symbology calls back to German Nazi symbology because they idealize it, and a dog whistle is more effective when there is history behind it.
But, shit, Wiccanism and mysticism steals so heavily from the past it’s hard to claim originality in any of it.
I’m happy to hear counter-examples, though. I’m not dogmatic about this; it’s just that true originality is far, far more rare than borrowing just by the nature of humans and how we learn things.
Its not that others don’t borrow etc. To me, its that the far right just straight up steal everything because its not an ideology of idealism, despite the words they use. Its just an ideology of power and they use any method they can to get it. It doesn’t really stand for anything like, say, worker emancipation or the unity of human, spirit and nature which are the things you would draw from when making your own cultural identities.
You can’t really advertise, with a symbol, your policy being the will to dominate and expect positive results.
In fact, the far right ripped off everything associated with them. They very deliberately don’t set trends but follow them, as this best facilitates their aims. For example, original skinhead culture had nothing to do with the far right and was only meant as a way for working class to distinguish themselves from the hippies, who they saw as upper middle class.
Of course, everyone knows the “steal from one person is plagiarism but steal from many is research” line. My point here is that almost all of the others, to me, would fall under the “research” umbrella whereas the far right would all be under the latter. At least, thats how I see the difference.
I have a theory about this.
I think some of it comes from religion, from being conditioned to believe in hierarchy, to believe someone knows better than you and is worth following, even if you don’t understand why. It’s faith. And you have to follow it; if you have proof, it’s no longer faith, it’s fact, and fact is somehow less. All the fascists do is replace religion with a cult of personality, but that desperate need to have someone to follow, someone who knows the answers, is very simian. I don’t know if we’ll ever entirely evolve out of it, even if we avoid extincting ourselves.