They tried that in Reddit back in 2019, and it failed. Frenworld tried taking rainbow flags to mean “A seperate place for every race” ahortly before they got banned.
No, symbols are just hard to change. Once they have a meaning associated to them, you can’t take the meaning away. A pride flag is symbol, so ot means something. An ok hand gesture doesn’t have much beyond “ok” to it, so it can quickly be taken over and poisoned.
A drop of poison in a glass will kill you, but a drop in an lake won’t harm anyone.
That’s fine, detach from the flag and pick something else. It’s the act of repulsion I’m clarifying. If a group chooses, a poisoner has no power, they are discarded.
That’s why the ok sign is still “in most contexts is entirely innocuous and harmless”, even according to the ADL. Because it had, you know, a meaning associated to it …
Tbf the fact that it failed kinda proves his point, and the fact that the ok symbol is “now a nazi dogwhistle” (or, like, that whole “swastika” thing. disproves your second point.)
Can’t tell if you’re saying the hindus/other cultures had used the swastika for years and so that’s why the nazis were able to steal it (which would seem to be applicable to the pride flag as well, also an established symbol,) or that the nazis were able to adopt the OK symbol because it wasn’t well established as a symbol for one group, but rather a general signal for “Ok” since like wwii.
In any case, I doubt it, if that were the reason why wouldn’t they have been successful in taking the swastika but not the pride flag, both established symbols? Much more likely that it didn’t work “because we didn’t let it” which kinda seems to be his entire point imo.
BakerBagel@midwest.social 1 month ago
They tried that in Reddit back in 2019, and it failed. Frenworld tried taking rainbow flags to mean “A seperate place for every race” ahortly before they got banned.
GBU_28@lemm.ee 1 month ago
It was a hypothetical. Pick anything you want.
And anyways you proved my point, the “society” pushed back, ad discarded it, rather than allow it to be poisoned.
BakerBagel@midwest.social 1 month ago
No, symbols are just hard to change. Once they have a meaning associated to them, you can’t take the meaning away. A pride flag is symbol, so ot means something. An ok hand gesture doesn’t have much beyond “ok” to it, so it can quickly be taken over and poisoned.
A drop of poison in a glass will kill you, but a drop in an lake won’t harm anyone.
GBU_28@lemm.ee 1 month ago
That’s fine, detach from the flag and pick something else. It’s the act of repulsion I’m clarifying. If a group chooses, a poisoner has no power, they are discarded.
“Ok” meant “ok” for many years
ninpnin@sopuli.xyz 1 month ago
That’s why the ok sign is still “in most contexts is entirely innocuous and harmless”, even according to the ADL. Because it had, you know, a meaning associated to it …
ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 month ago
Tbf the fact that it failed kinda proves his point, and the fact that the ok symbol is “now a nazi dogwhistle” (or, like, that whole “swastika” thing. disproves your second point.)
SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 1 month ago
There was already a large, active movement that had adopted the symbol. None such movement existed for the “OK” hand gesture.
ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 month ago
Can’t tell if you’re saying the hindus/other cultures had used the swastika for years and so that’s why the nazis were able to steal it (which would seem to be applicable to the pride flag as well, also an established symbol,) or that the nazis were able to adopt the OK symbol because it wasn’t well established as a symbol for one group, but rather a general signal for “Ok” since like wwii.
In any case, I doubt it, if that were the reason why wouldn’t they have been successful in taking the swastika but not the pride flag, both established symbols? Much more likely that it didn’t work “because we didn’t let it” which kinda seems to be his entire point imo.