Should the Swastika be banned?
On a late June afternoon, I received a WhatsApp message. The State of New York was considering a bill that would mandate that the Swastika be taught as a symbol of hatred and intolerance in all New York schools. (Note: As of July, the bill has been stalled due to widespread outrage among Hindu, Buddhist, Jain and other communities due to the deeply religious significance of the Swastika in these traditions).
The message piqued my interest, since a group of us started CoHNA (Coalition of Hindus of North America) a few months earlier as a grassroots advocacy organization which promotes a better understanding of Hinduism in North America. Naturally, the Swastika and its equivalents hold immense sacred significance for Hindus, Buddhists, Jains, Native Americans, and many other cultures, and are thousands of years old. As a Hindu, I cannot imagine life without sacred symbols like Om, Swastika, Trishul, Tilak, and others. They form a deep connection through which we express our identities while connecting with the Divine. Each has its unique place in Hindu symbolism and practices (a topic for a different day).
I was very disturbed that the Swastika would even be considered in a bill intended to spread education about hatred and intolerance; that too in New York, which has a large Hindu population. Thus, we decided to launch a campaign to stop this bill from passing in its current form and embarked on a mission to connect with community organizations, individuals, and lawmakers to rapidly spread awareness about this issue. Many community organizations and leaders joined in the efforts, and together, we finally managed to stall the bill.
Without a doubt, educating students about hatred, racism and bigotry is essential. This is even more urgent, given the recent increase in hate crimes against Jewish and African American communities. Incidents of Neo-Nazi emblems being graffiti-ed outside Jewish homes and synagogues, often accompanied by horrific acts of violence by hate groups have seen an alarming increase. Hindus and Sikhs have also been targets of of Neo-Nazis and those who support Nazi ideology.
Yet, the important work of fighting bigotry and racism must not inadvertently stoke resentment against other religious minorities. This was our fear about including the Swastika as a hate symbol without proper context in the New York bill.
Swastika — a sacred and auspicious symbol
Swastika is a Sanskrit word, derived from the roots su and asti, and means “that which brings good luck and well-being.” The word swasti appears in the Vedas and across classical Hindu literature, as illustrated by this famous Mantra from the Rigveda:
Om Swasti Na Indro Vriddhashravah Swasti Nah Pusha Vishva-Vedah।
Swasti Nastarkshyoarishta-Nemih Swasti No Brihaspatirdadhatu॥
Translation — Om! May Indra, who is provided with great speed do well to us, may Pushan, who is the knower of the world, do good to us and may Tarkshya who devastates enemies do good to us! May Brihaspati, the Lord of Vedic knowledge or speech, give us spiritual delight gotten from the light of knowledge and wisdom.
Similarly, the Puranas, the Upanishads and other Hindu philosophical texts use the word for greetings, to denote all that is auspicious and sacred, among other things.
Swastika’s simple yet profound design has many different meanings. It denotes the movement of the universe, the four Vedas themselves, the four-fold goals of life (Dharma, Artha, Kama, Moksha), the four stage of life, etc.
Hindus use Swastika extensively. It adorns the entrances of our homes as a “welcome” sign and can be seen in our Mandirs (temples) — both at home and outside. Some Hindus use a Swastika as part of their yoga (a posture known as Swastikasana) and meditation practices. In a traditional head shaving ceremony (called Mundan), a large Swastika is drawn on a child’s head as a sign of auspiciousness. Similarly, in festivals such as Diwali, Navratri, etc. Hindus draw Swastikas at the entrances of their homes and create color patterns called Rangolis containing Swastikas.
Buddhists and Jains also use Swastika in various aspects of their lives. In Japan, Swastikas (also known as Manji in Japanese) can be seen on street maps, temples and other places.
Over 1.5 Billion people use this symbol and its equivalents for a variety of religious purposes.
Swastika in American culture
Prior to the Swastika legislation controversy, I had limited knowledge of the extent to which the Swastika and its equivalents were used in American and world culture before WWII. For example, the symbol was on Boy Scouts paraphernalia, Coca Cola products, on the uniform of hockey teams, in fashion accessories, etc.
In fact, I recently found out that the United States has had towns named Swastika. On September 23, 2020, the town of Swastika, New York voted to keep its name, citing the symbol’s auspicious origins in Hindu and Buddhist traditions. A town in Colorado was also known as Swastika Acres, though it changed its name in 2019 after having it for 111 years. A US Army base in San Diego is shaped in the form of a Swastika. Not just in the United States, there is a town named Swastika in Ontario, Canada too!
In 1896, Thomas Wilson, a curator at the US National Museum, wrote a fascinating book called The swastika : the earliest known symbol, and its migrations : with observations on the migration of certain industries in prehistoric times, where he discussed the Swastika and similar objects in various cultures around the world, from ancient India to Europe, Latin America and Australia.
Unfortunately, these connections got heavily overshadowed due to World War II and the resulting murder of six million Jews, one and half million Roma and others at the hands of Hitler and the Nazis. Hitler’s emblem of hatred brings trauma, pain, and intimidation to Jewish Americans even today, and we have seen increased hate crimes in New York, Pittsburgh and other locations at the hands of Neo-Nazis and white supremacists.
Did Hitler use the Swastika as his symbol?
Yet, as I thought about that horrific era, my conscience told me that something was not right. Did Hitler really use the Swastika, or was it something else?
I looked into the history and soon realized that the negative connotation of the Swastika was not because of Hitler’s usage. Rather, it stemmed from conflation of the symbol that Hitler used — the Hakenkreuz (a German word, meaning “hooked cross”)— with Swastika. There is overwhelming evidence showing this, some of which is listed below.
The “hooked cross” became popular in Germany when archaeologist Heinrich Schliemann discovered it on the site of ancient Troy in 1872 and wrote about it in this 1891 book (link with English translation). Thanks to his French cartographer Emil Burnouf (who harbored anti-Jewish sentiment), Schliemann connected it with similar shapes found on pottery in Germany and misinterpreted it as a valuable symbol of their ancestors and of a master race known as “Aryans,” due to the increasing acceptance of racial theories during nineteenth century Europe. Other European scholars and thinkers provided additional fuel to this racist and supremacist theory, and the connection began to take a dangerous turn. German nationalist groups started using this symbol as a sign of the “Aryan master race” and the German-Aryan connection.
But, was it the Swastika?
While the symbol appeared similar, it was not the Swastika. My research on this topic led me to the works of many scholars, including Rev. T.K. Nakagaki, President of the Buddhist Council of New York. Nakagaki’s book The Buddhist Swastika and Hitler’s Cross: Rescuing a Symbol of Peace from the Forces of Hate, provides exhaustive details about the Swastika as well as its wrongful association with the Hakenkreuz, the symbol used by Hitler and the Nazis. According to Nakagaki,
“Many in the West believe that Hitler invented the swastika symbol. He didn’t. Many also believe he invented the word ‘swastika’ to describe it. He didn’t do that either. But, he did consciously use a different German word, ‘Hakenkreuz,’ and that is more significant because in the use of that word we can see how Hitler saw the symbol…”
Similarly, Dr. Daniel Rancour-Laferriere, an expert on Christianity and Professor Emeritus at University of California Davis, provides plethora of evidence regarding Hitler’s Christian upbringing and the influence of Christian symbolism on him. In his book The Sign of the Cross: From Golgotha to Genocide Rancour-Laferriere shows that Hitler’s decision to use the Hakenkreuz as a symbol of the Nazi party may have been due to his childhood upbringing at the Benedictine Monastery in Austria, where he repeatedly saw the “hooked cross” in multiple places, and used to see a statue of Abbot Theoderich von Hagen, who had a stylized Hakenkreuz in the coat of arms.
Furthermore, Rancour-Laferriere points out the mistranslation of Hakenkreuz into Swastika, even though a native German speaker can easily understand that the infamous term is translated as “hook” (Haken) “cross” (Kreuz). Rancour-Laferriere observes: “It cannot be disputed that, as a boy, Adolf Hitler repeatedly saw the hooked cross in the Christian context of the Benedictine Catholic Monastery where he had his choir lessons and other classes…”
Rancour-Laferriere’s book discusses the work of Werner Maser, a famous German historian and a leading expert on Hitler who observed that in an early notebook of Hitler, we find a sketch of a projected book cover featuring the hooked cross which looked similar to what would become the Nazi flag of the future. Maser believed that the hooked cross and the banner reflected the influence of the Hakenkreuz that Hitler saw at Lambach Abbey and on the coat of arms of Abbot Hagen.
To illustrates this further, German historian John Vincent Palatine discusses Hitler’s affinity for the monastery, his admiration for the Abbot and his constant encounters with the Hakenkreuz at the monastery. In his article, The Oedipus Factor — Alois Hitler and his son Adolf, Palatine outlines Hitler’s childhood experiences as follows:
“Lambach had a quite modern primary school in which Adolf did well…He also participated in the monastery’s boys’ choir, where he, probably for the first time in his life, saw the [hooked cross]. The depiction was part of a previous abbot’s coat of arms, a huge specimen of which was fastened to the stone arch over the abbey’s entrance, which the boys had to pass under on the way to choir practice…”
Using Hitler’s own words from Mein Kampf, Palatine illustrates the young dictator’s admiration for the church and the Abbot:
“Again and again I enjoyed the best possibility of intoxicating myself with the solemn splendour (sic) of the dazzling festivals of the church. It seemed to me perfectly natural to regard the abbot as the highest and more desirable ideal, just as my father regarded the village priest as his ideal.”
Palatine goes on to state the impression that the Hakenkreuz had left on Hitler’s mind:
“One thing [Hitler] clearly kept in mind was the [hooked cross] he had discovered on the abbot’s coat of arms. The original bearer of the coat, Abbot Theoderich von Hagen, had been the prior of the monastery in the middle of the preceding century, and the [symbol] was not only featured on his coat but was found at many places in the structure as an element of decoration.”
Similarly, Rancour-Laferriere points us to the writings of Robert Payne, the famous biographer of Hitler’s life, who also surmised that the Hakenkreuz at the monastery was the source of Hitler’s Nazi emblem.
Thus, the Hakenkreuz was the source of Hitler’s Nazi emblem and not the Swastika.
“Christenkreuz” and “Hakenkreuz”
Hitler recognized the power of a symbol to bring about transformation of ideas and society in ways he saw fit. In Mein Kampf, he recounts his experience at a Marxist rally in Berlin, and the profound impact of symbolism on the masses:
“More than once in my youth, the psychological importance of such a symbol had been clearly evident to me from the point of view of sentiment. In Berlin, after the War, I was present at a mass demonstration of Marxism in front of the Royal Palace. A sea of red flags, red scarves, and red flowers, gave an outward appearance of power to that crowd, which I estimated at about 120,000 persons. I felt and understood how easily the man in the street is impressed by the suggestive magic of such a grandiose piece of play-acting.”
He details this thought process while designing the Nazi flag and its colors, remarking how the symbol had to spark curiosity and stir emotions among the masses. The symbol had to have a “striking, poster-like effect” and ignite a desire “to know more about the movement in hundreds of thousands of cases.”
For a devoutly Christian country such as Germany, nothing would resonate more than a symbol connected to their roots and theological beliefs. This is discussed in further sections.
Hooked cross in Christianity
In order to understand why Hitler chose the Hakenkreuz and not any other symbol, one must study the importance and usage of this symbol in Christianity and in German literature, as well as the dynamics surrounding racial and theological narratives in nineteenth century Europe and Germany.
The hooked cross holds deep significance in Christianity, and can be found across Europe and other places where Christianity is practiced, from the tombs of the Knights Templar to mosaic on the floor of the Byzantine Church in Shavei-Zion, on the walls of the Lalibela Church in Ethiopia, in churches in Mexico and in Macedonia, etc. The hooked cross was seen as the symbol of Jesus’ victory over death and persecution.
Thus, for Hitler, who was exposed to such teachings at the Lambach Abbey, it was quite natural to see this connection and twist it into a powerful yet evil symbol known to the masses and one that could be easily repurposed to arouse anti-Jewish emotions among the Volk.
“Hooked cross” in German literature and language
The connections between the Christian cross (known as “Christenkreuz” in German) and the hooked cross (known as “Hakenkreuz” in German) can be found in multiple places within the German language as well as in literature. Take for example, the Knight’s Cross, (Ritterkreuz), which was created by Hitler as the highest award in the military and paramilitary forces of Nazi Germany during World War II. Similarly, the Balkenkreuz, a stylized version of the Knight’s Cross, was the emblem of the German Armed Forces during World War II.
Rancour-Laferriere’s book provides several additional examples. The varied uses of words across periodicals, images, references, etc. show that the Germans were aware that the Hakenkreuz was a “hooked cross” and nothing else. For instance, Christuskreuz und Hakenkreuz was a protestant periodical which supported Hitler. Another book, called Kreuz und Hakenkreuz details the relationship between the Church and the Nazis. And a paper, titled Kreuz und Hakenkreuz — Zur rechtlichen Stellung der Religionsgemeinschaften im nationalsozialistischen Staat, also discusses the complex relationship between the Church and the Nazis. Finally, in 2017, an exhibition in Berlin, titled Christenkreuz und Hakenkreuz discussed the influence of Nazi Socialist ideology in the design of the churches that were built after Hitler came to power. None of these periodicals or works use the word Swastika.
The German Church and the Nazis
In order for a symbol to have a strong and popular appeal, it had to resonate with the masses. As outlined below, the relationship between the Church and the Nazis of the era provides overwhelming evidence that Germans as well as the Nazis saw a strong connection between Hitler’s Hakenkreuz and the Christian cross, not the Swastika.
According to the US Holocaust Museum, most of the German Christians supported hatred against Jews and thus welcomed the rise of Nazism, as illustrated by an excerpt from Article 24 of The Nazi Party Platform:
“…The Party as such upholds the point of view of a positive Christianity without tying itself confessionally to any one confession. It combats the Jewish-materialistic spirit at home and abroad and is convinced that a permanent recovery of our people can only be achieved from within on the basis of the common good before individual good.”
The Museum concludes: “Despite the open antisemitism of this statement and its linkage between confessional ‘freedom’ and a nationalistic, racialized understanding of morality, many Christians in Germany at the time read this as an affirmation of Christian values.”
This is further evident from the writings of Gerhard Hahn, a prominent leader of the Lutheran Church of Hanover, Germany. Speaking of the solidarity between the Hakenkreuz and the Christian cross, Hahn proudly declared:
“The cross of Christ and the [Hakenkreuz] do not need to oppose each other, and must not do so, but rather they can and should stand together. One should not dominate the other, but rather each should maintain its own meaning and significance…Both together, however, the cross of Christ and the [Hakenkreuz], admonish us: Remember that you are German Christian people and should become ever more whole German Christian people, and remain so!”
Finally, this relationship between the Church and Nazi Germany was officially sealed by the 1933 Reich Concordat, signed by the Vatican and the Nazis, allowing the latter to garner additional credibility.
While discussing the Holocaust, Elie Wiesel, the 1986 Nobel Peace Prize winner, had less than kind words to describe the ideological environment leading to the Holocaust. Putting it bluntly, Wiesel remarked:
“All the killers were Christians. The Nazi system was the consequence of a movement of ideas and followed a strict logic; it did not arise in a void but had its roots deep in a tradition that prophesied it, prepared for it, and brought it to maturity. That tradition was inseparable from the past of Christian, civilized Europe.”
Indeed, various studies have highlighted the centuries old persecution of Jews at the hands of Christians in Europe, from being forced to dress in certain ways and carry certain marks, to being subjected to systemic pogroms. Thus, it is easy to see why a powerful narrative married with Christian symbolism would gain popularity.
The Aryan Christ
Susanna Heschel, a professor of Jewish Studies at Dartmouth College and the author of the meticulously detailed book The Aryan Jesus: Christian Theologians and the Bible in Nazi Germany describes a massive theological attempt to de-couple Jesus from his Jewish ancestry and transform him into a symbol of resistance for the “Aryans.” According to Heschel, “various theological strategies were employed during the nineteenth century to distance Jesus from Judaism, but with the rise of racial theory suggestions began to circulate that Jesus was not a Jew, but rather an Aryan, born in the town of Galilee, where an ethnically mixed population lived.”
During the Third Reich, individuals such as Walter Grundmann, a leading figure in the pro-Nazi faction of the German Protestant Church, Deutsche Christen, provided significant theological and institutional support to advance this theory. According to Heschel, Grundmann and his ilk posited that Jesus was not Jewish but a “an anti-Jewish Aryan whose true identity had been concealed by Jews who entered the early church and falsified the Gospels.” In 1939, Grundmann set up the Institute for the Study and Eradication of Jewish Influence on German Religious Life, a cross-church establishment by eleven Protestant churches. The institute became the most important propaganda vehicle for German Protestantism, which produced a “nazified Christianity” at its theological core. According to Heschel, the Institute started with the declaration: “Is Christianity derived from Judaism and is it its continuation and completion, or does Christianity stand in opposition to Judaism? We answer this question: Christianity is the unbridgeable religious opposition to Judaism.”
Around two hundred church leaders, pastors, professors and academic theologians were willing to collaborate with or support the institute.
While the idea of an Aryan Jesus took new and dangerous turns during the Third Reich, it is important to note, as Heschel noted earlier, that the seeds of such “Aryanization” of Jesus trace back to nineteenth century. Growing up, Hitler was well aware of such theories. A devout Christian, Hitler squarely blamed Jews for persecuting Jesus. However, he and others could not bear Jesus’ Jewish heritage, and thus sought “de-judaize” Jesus in their own ways, calling him a “Aryan fighter” and the savior of the world against Jewry. To quote Hitler’s words:
“And the founder of Christianity made no secret indeed of his estimation of the Jewish people. When He found it necessary, He drove those enemies of the human race out of the Temple of God; because then, as always, they used religion as a means of advancing their commercial interests. But at that time Christ was nailed to the Cross for his attitude towards the Jews…”
Based on the above information, it is beyond doubt that Hitler saw in the Hakenkreuz a symbol of the struggle of an Aryan Jesus, who was nailed to the Cross for his transgressions against Jews. Clearly then, Hitler’s Hakenkreuz would symbolize the persecution of Jesus and resistance against “Jewish world domination,” narratives promoted by various churches for the past 2,000 years.
Mein Kampf — From translation to deliberate mistranslation
As Nakagaki points out in his book, many in the West think that Hitler invented the word Swastika or that it is present in his writings. To analyze this, I browsed through three early English translations of Hitler’s Mein Kampf. Evidently, Hitler did not use the word Swastika anywhere in Mein Kampf— only “Hakenkreuz.” Some relevant passages from Mein Kampf (original, German version) read as follows (emphasis added):
“1. Dennoch mußte ich die zahllosen Entwürfe, die damals aus den Kreisen der jungen Bewegung einliefen, und die meistens das Hakenkreuz in die alte Fahne hineingezeichnet hatten, ausnahmslos ablehnen.
2. atsächlich hat ein Zahnarzt aus Starnberg auch einen gar nicht schlechten Entwurf geliefert, der übrigens dem meinen ziemlich nahekam, nur den einen Fehler hatte, daß das Hakenkreuz mit gebogenen Haken in eine weiße Scheibe hineinkomponiert war.
3. Ich selbst hatte unterdes nach unzähligen Versuchen eine endgültige Form niedergelegt; eine Fahne aus rotem Grundtuch mit einer weißen Scheibe und in deren Mitte ein schwarzes Hakenkreuz. Nach langen Versuchen fand ich auch ein bestimmtes Verhältnis zwischen der Größe der Fahne und der Größe der weißen Scheibe sowie der Form und Stärke des Hakenkreuzes.”
Nowhere does the word Swastika appear above. Had Hitler known about this word through previous associations with German socialist groups, he would have used it.
To illustrate this further, the first (abridged) translation of Mein Kampf was done by Englishman E.T.S Dugdale in 1931. Dugdale, who was fluent in German and had done work for the German government, accurately translated the relevant passages and never once used the word Swastika. To quote some passages from Dugdale’s translation (emphasis added):
“After innumerable trials, I settled upon a final form: a flag having a red background, with a white disc in it, bearing on its center a black hooked cross. After much searching, I decided upon the proper proportions between the size of the flag and that of the white disc, and the form and thickness of the cross; and it has remained so ever since. Armbands, also of the same, were at once ordered for the men of the bodies for keeping order — red with a white disc and a hooked cross in it. The new flag first appeared in public in the middle of the summer of 1920.”
Thus, a literal translation from German to English would produce “hooked cross,” as rightly done by Dugdale.
Another interesting point to note is from the work of Thomas Wilson of the Smithsonian Museum (discussed earlier), who writes how the word Swastika did not appear in any major dictionary or reference source during his time, admitting:
“I began a search of which proved almost futile, as even the word Swastika did not appear in such works as Worcester’s or Webster’s dictionaries, the Encyclopedic Dictionary, the Encyclopedia Britannica, Johnson’s Universal Cyclopedia, the People’s Cyclopedia, nor Smith’s Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities…In the American Encyclopedia the description is erroneous while all the Century Dictionary says is ‘same as fylfot,’ and ‘Compare Crux Ansata and Gammadion.’”
Thus, at best, the definition of Swastika implied a resemblance to other symbols observed in Europe, rather than the equivalence.
The deliberate mistranslation
Unfortunately, Dugdale’s translation did not become popular due to a host of reasons. However, one translation that did gain popularity, was that of Irish Catholic Priest and journalist James Vincent Murphy. Murphy published the first complete translation of Mein Kampf in 1939. Murphy deliberately mistranslated Hakenkreuz into Swastika while leaving other German words either in original form or translating them properly in English. For example, in his preface, Murphy describes how he carefully avoided translating Weltanschhauung and Volkisch. To quote:
“There are a few points more that I wish to mention in this introductory note. For instance, I have let the word Weltanschhauung stand in its original form very often. We have no one English word to convey the same meaning as the German word, and it would have burdened the text too much if I were to use a circumlocution each time the word occurs. Weltanschhauung literally means ‘Outlook-on-the World.’
Another word I have often left standing in the original is völkisch. The basic word here is Volk, which is sometimes translated as People; but the German word, Volk, means the whole body of the people without any distinction of class or caste.”
It is evident that Murphy was familiar with native German words that didn’t really have English equivalents! Furthermore, if there were no English equivalents of these words, how does Swastika (a Sanskrit word used by Hindus, Buddhists and Jains only) then become the English translation of Hakenkreuz?
Hitler did not know English or any other languages such as Sanskrit and was not familiar with the word “Swastika.” This is clearly established by the fact that Hitler uses the word “Aryan” extensively in Mein Kampf. “Aryan” is a Sanskrit word, which he learned within the context of the the racist Aryan Supremacy Theory expounded by the likes of Houston Stewart Chamberlain, Arthur de Gobineau and others, along with nineteenth century theological attempts to make Jesus a symbol of Aryan struggle. Had he learned about the Swastika as a symbol of ancient Aryans, he would have included the word.
One cannot help but conclude that Murphy, being an ordained priest, didn’t want the evil Nazi symbol to be associated in any way with the sacred hooked cross of Christianity, and thus deliberately mistranslated Hakenkreuz into Swastika.
Indeed, as Nakagaki admits in his book: “Whether intentional or not, these translators protected the Christian cross and damaged the Eastern religious swastika.”
The damage of wrongfully associating Swastika with Hakenkreuz
The scale of the damage is such that a symbol used by close to 1.5 Billion people in the world in their religious and cultural practices (a symbol that literally means well-being and peace), is wrongfully associated with evil, death and destruction.
Wrongfully associating the Swastika with the Hakenkreuz endorses bigotry and creates a dangerous environment for Hindus, Buddhists and Jains; it promotes the viewpoint that their religions are closely tied to Nazi ideology. What’s more, when lawmakers such as those in New York attempt to pass legislation deeming a sacred symbol as an emblem of hatred, millions of kids attending schools are forced to learn that a symbol of peace and well-being is a symbol of death and destruction. It will lead to unprecedented levels of bullying and attacks on students belonging to these religious backgrounds in schools and colleges across the Western world, as well as escalate the spread of Hinduphobia worldwide rather than fostering an environment of mutual respect and understanding.
Google Mistranslation
Millions of users rely on Google Translate to interpret documents in foreign languages. The below illustrates how a mistranslation can can lead to the entire world interpreting the Hakenkreuz as the Swastika. In the first picture, the word “Christenkreuz” is translated as “Christian cross” but the word “Hakenkreuz” is translated as “Swastika”! What’s worse, in the second picture, when broken up, “Haken” is translated as “hook”, “Kreuz” is translated as “cross” but “Hakenkreuz is translated as “Swastika”!
Conclusion
Understanding the historical context behind Hitler’s creation of the Hakenkreuz, along with correcting the above errors and the wrongful association between his emblem and the Swastika is critical in order to remove misconceptions about a deeply sacred symbol. At the same time, we must acknowledge the sensitivities around the pain and trauma suffered by the Jewish, Roma and other communities at the hands of the Nazis and white supremacists. Hindus and Sikhs are also targets of Neo-Nazis and those who support Nazi ideology. Only through mutual understanding and respect can we make the world a better place for all.
Yes, Hitler did misappropriate an ancient symbol for evil purposes. However, that symbol was the Hooked Cross and not the Swastika.
Hitler’s Hakenkreuz needs to be condemned, along with the racist Aryan theory (taught in schools even today) and the resulting genocide and destruction. At the same time, the world needs to appreciate and respect that the Swastika has nothing to do with the Hakenkreuz and thus must not wrongfully associate the two.
In 1633, Galileo was imprisoned by the Catholic Church and spent the rest of his life under house arrest. It took more than 300 years for the Church to admit that Galileo was right and to clear his name of heresy.
Thus, change must begin somewhere. To end with the words of Gandhi: “Each of us must be the change we wish to see in this world.”
