Ju 88P-5 What If GB Build on MMM

[ChernayaAkula]

IIRC it's a blanket ban on any swastikas. 

Correct. Anything that is or resembles a swastika is banned. Since Hakaristi look so similar to the German Hakenkreuz, they fall under the ban as well.

Maybe "eatthis" isn't aware of the legal implications of showing the swastika in public here in Germany (and since he's not living here, why should he?), but it's really not just a question of wanting to put it on or not. It's simply banned. Period. Below is what I wrote on the situation in another thread on another site:

"The "ban" of the swatika in everyday life is covered by an article of our Strafgesetzbuch (criminal law). THIS ARTICLE on Wikipedia has a translated excerpt of the relevant article in our Strafgesetzbuch (criminal law). As you can see, there are also exceptions that allow you to show a swastika in certain contexts, such as civic education, arts or teaching. Scale modelling doesn't seem to fall under any of these exceptions. A German court once ruled (1970s, I think) that swastikas can't be displayed on toys (including model aircraft). The judge feared that displaying them on toys might have an "accustoming effect" on children. He thought that since they're children, they might not be able to reflect on the historical context and take the swastika for an everyday symbol.
Finnish Hakaristi are outlawed as "symbols which are so similar as to be mistaken for those named" (quoted from the law) are also outlawed. Of course, the Finns used the Hakaristi on their aircraft long before the NSDAP rose to power (long before the NSDAP was even founded, actually), but they're just so similar.

If this law makes it harder for neo-fascists to spew their bullcrap, I can very well live with not being able to display swastikas on my model aircraft in public (although some kill marks on Thunderbolts or Mustangs do look strange). I, for one, think that all relevant exemptions to the ban are covered in § 86 (3) StGB. Yeah, modelling isn't covered by it, but, oh well."

[Dizzyfugu]

Personally, I find the Nazi Cylon Raider here in the forum pretty "cheap" and tasteless, but that's me, and I won't start an argument about it. 

Could I just point out though that your comment above could be construed as being a tad rude about another forum members work. I`m pretty sure it was not created or meant to offend anybody in particular. 

Yes, you could - but, again, that's my personal taste and opinion. Nothing more, it is not directed personally against someone else. It also does NOT mean that I "devalue" the work as such, or disdain the maker. This is a free world, and also not a German forum.
It's just the fact that I am not a fan of deliberate use of certain symbolism, and - as a general statement - you should think twice before you add or post such a thing. It MIGHT be offensive to some people. 

[tc2324]

IIRC it's a blanket ban on any swastikas. 

Correct. Anything that is or resembles a swastika is banned. Since Hakaristi look so similar to the German Hakenkreuz, they fall under the ban as well.

Maybe "eatthis" isn't aware of the legal implications of showing the swastika in public here in Germany (and since he's not living here, why should he?), but it's really not just a question of wanting to put it on or not. It's simply banned. Period. Below is what I wrote on the situation in another thread on another site:

"The "ban" of the swatika in everyday life is covered by an article of our Strafgesetzbuch (criminal law). THIS ARTICLE on Wikipedia has a translated excerpt of the relevant article in our Strafgesetzbuch (criminal law). As you can see, there are also exceptions that allow you to show a swastika in certain contexts, such as civic education, arts or teaching. Scale modelling doesn't seem to fall under any of these exceptions. A German court once ruled (1970s, I think) that swastikas can't be displayed on toys (including model aircraft). The judge feared that displaying them on toys might have an "accustoming effect" on children. He thought that since they're children, they might not be able to reflect on the historical context and take the swastika for an everyday symbol.
Finnish Hakaristi are outlawed as "symbols which are so similar as to be mistaken for those named" (quoted from the law) are also outlawed. Of course, the Finns used the Hakaristi on their aircraft long before the NSDAP rose to power (long before the NSDAP was even founded, actually), but they're just so similar.

If this law makes it harder for neo-fascists to spew their bullcrap, I can very well live with not being able to display swastikas on my model aircraft in public (although some kill marks on Thunderbolts or Mustangs do look strange). I, for one, think that all relevant exemptions to the ban are covered in § 86 (3) StGB. Yeah, modelling isn't covered by it, but, oh well."

A very informative post Moritz which hopefully will clarify the reasoning behind such a ban. 

During my diecast collecting days I remember Corgi, Altaya and Dragon removing the Hakenkreuz from some of their releases for a time which caused an uproar and sales to drop until they reinstated it. Obviously this wasn`t because collectors loved the Swastika, they just felt that the model was incomplete and not authentic without it.

[tc2324]

deliberate use of certain symbolism

But you have to ask yourself, was it deliberate use? Do you feel that this model and it`s markings were aimed at causing offense?

I completely understand your dislike for this symbol Dizzy, however I think it unfair to say that everyone outside of Germany should think twice before sticking a Swastika on a model, especially a forum like this forum, where anything goes. (Within reason of course). My very first What if model was an Avro Vulcan in..., you guessed it, Luftwaffe markings. As I recall I got a few `comments` thrown my way for having a German Hakenkreuz on a British icon from a number of my fellow English countrymen.

Did I put that marking on the tail to upset or to offend..? Of course not. If the Luftwaffe `had` a Vulcan bomber during the war, it would of had a swastika on the tail. It`s a sad fact, but a fact nevertheless.

It`s the same for the Cylon raider you pointed out. It looks like it`s done in a world war two era German bomber paint scheme with the relevant markings to go with it which would of included a Hakenkreuz.

I do not feel IMPO that this model is cheap and tasteless and nor was it made to cause offence. Nor do I feel this was a deliberate use of an offensive symbol but rather someone just making sure that the paint scheme and markings were correct with their `what if` creation.

[Dizzyfugu]

deliberate use of certain symbolism

But you have to ask yourself, was it deliberate use? Do you feel that this model and it`s markings were aimed at causing offense?

I completely understand your dislike for this symbol Dizzy, however I think it unfair to say that everyone outside of Germany should think twice before sticking a Swastika on a model, especially a forum like this forum, where anything goes.

Before this drifts into a suggestive discussion (since it sounds like this to me): anyone (esp. here) can use Nazi symbolism, I am the last one to chime in and cry around. And why is it unfair to say so? My point is that there's a lot of political meaning (and abuse) behind it, and I wonder how easily a swastika is used in order to add some "evil touch" to a model (that's what I meant with "cheap" - I certainly see the humor behind the Cylon Raider, and like it - but it would have worked well without the swastikas on it, too).

This might be the "German perspective" onto things, and I just wanted to mention it. I am not here to moralize - I'd just be happy about modelers' second thoughts about what they do. But that's not a mission, it's my personal opinion, if not taste, and discussion becomes futile at this point. It's much like using blood and gory scenes in dioramas. Would you, because it is "realistic"? 

Who am I to prevent this? But I must not like it.

[tc2324]

My point is that there's a lot of political meaning (and abuse) behind it, and I wonder how easily a swastika is used in order to add some "evil touch" to a model (that's what I meant with "cheap").

Well hopefully and as far as I can remember, the symbol has never been used on here in `anger` and I don`t see the present members doing so.

I`m sure Narses2 would be the first to jump on anyone seen abusing the forum in that way. 

[NARSES2]

I`m sure Narses2 would be the first to jump on anyone seen abusing the forum in that way.  

Yes I would.

[Weaver]

My personal opinion is that I find the reasoning behind the ban on swastikas on models unconvincing: I seriously doubt whether any child's moral development has ever been affected by such things. I'm also extremely dubious of attempts to "airbrush" the past to make it match modern value judgements and sensitivities, and to my mind, yes, that does include a real world model of a Fw-190 with no swastika on it's tail. The Fw-190 was a product of the Nazi regime and should always be clearly recognised as such: take the swastika away and it loses some context and becomes "one of those cool German planes from the '40s", which is not, to me, an improvement. A real-world historical model is no different, in my judgement, from a colour-plate of a uniform or flag in a history book: it's responsibility is to represent the past accurately and anything else is a distortion.

Having said that, I certainly wouldn't criticise another modeller's decision not to use it if they felt uncomfortable with it, and in some contexts, particularly What If, I totally understand that discomfort. I once did a "role reversal" model of a British "last-ditch" rocket-fighter displayed in a Nazi museum after the latter had won the war, and did the write-up in the style of sneering, biased Nazi propagandistic magazine article. I was amazed at how uncomfortable and "dirty" I felt just writing it, even though it was entirely justifiable in the what-if historical context and the intention was clearly to make the reader shudder and think "there but for the grace of God....." . It's not an exercise I'll be repeating for fun any time soon. I think that when presenting a What If scenario involving Nazi Germany doing better than it did historically, there's a real risk of slipping from "what if?" into "if only...". I don't think What If modellers should avoid such scenarios, but I do think extra thought is advised when considering how to present them and in what context.

[eatthis]

if you want to put it on do so
if you dont want to put it on fine

[Go4fun]

I am reminded of something my mother told me. "Just because you don't like something doesn't mean you should deny it to those who do".

[Weaver]

By the way: excellent model tc2324 - nicely built and good back story. 

(Thought I'd put this in the last post but it vanished somehow... )

[tc2324]

By the way: excellent model tc2324 - nicely built and good back story. 

(Thought I'd put this in the last post but it vanished somehow... )

Cheers Weaver. 

[Go4fun]

If I failed to mention it the model is an excellent what if.

[ChernayaAkula]

Sorry in advance for the lengthy post, but this raises some questions that have been on mind a lot lately.

My personal opinion is that I find the reasoning behind the ban on swastikas on models unconvincing: I seriously doubt whether any child's moral development has ever been affected by such things. <...>

I guess the aim was not so much to protect a child's moral development. On its own it's just a sign. The idea was to keep the swastika from becoming an everyday sign amongst many again and risk it being associated with anything but the Third Reich and its specific context. The judge probably feared that the swastika could become just one of many symbols if not accompanied with the education on the subject. Say, a child playing with die-casts or building model aircraft such as P-51s and Me 109s and adorning his kits with stars'n'bars and swastikas respectively might not realise what the swastika stood for and come to see it as "just another symbol".
And, let's face it, the accompanying texts on most kits don't provide a whole lot of historical information, save for from some technical titbits. Maybe how many aircraft Hartmann shot down or how many tanks Rudel killed. Take the He 162. Technical blurbs on boxes may say it was optimised to be built in underground factories, but they probably won't mention the thousands of slave labourers that died digging these tunnels. Or that the He 219 might have matured into a great night fighter, but that it wasn't the pilots of the sleek 219 with guns blazing on the boxart, but the crew members of the burning Lanc or Halifax going down in the background which, ultimately, gave us Germans the freedom we enjoy today.

I'm also extremely dubious of attempts to "airbrush" the past to make it match modern value judgements and sensitivities,<...>

The ban of the swastika was never intended as a means to "sweep history under the carpet" or anything like that. On the contrary, the ban of the swastika in everyday life ensured that if it is shown publicly at all, it has to serve a purpose in terms of civic education, arts or teaching (or other aims as specified by the law).

I'm also extremely dubious of attempts to "airbrush" the past to make it match modern value judgements and sensitivities, and to my mind, yes, that does include a real world model of a Fw-190 with no swastika on it's tail. The Fw-190 was a product of the Nazi regime and should always be clearly recognised as such: take the swastika away and it loses some context and becomes "one of those cool German planes from the '40s", which is not, to me, an improvement. A real-world historical model is no different, in my judgement, from a colour-plate of a uniform or flag in a history book: it's responsibility is to represent the past accurately and anything else is a distortion.<...>

The question is: do models provide the context? I would argue that they don't, for the reasons stated above.
You, as a modeller and person, are one step farther. You already know the context, what the swastika stood for and what atrocities were committed when it stood for Germany. You are aware of what it symbolises. A child who doesn't know the background (which model kits don't provide) may not recognise the evil it stood for.
Could model kits provide the context? I don't know. They are, after all, mostly toys. Mostly built by children. Not the expensive ones, of course, but most of them are built by children. They do it with the intention of building something. They may learn a thing or two about history in the process, but that's only a side effect.
The photos or colour plates in books are intended to inform on history. They do provide the context. In such cases, the swastikas aren't censored or painted over.
I do see where you're coming from when you say that's inconsistent. I think the distinction is that reproductions of old photos or drawings of uniforms "as they were" are always accompanied by the background information, while a model kit is a bit of a blank canvas, where the accurate rendition of a historical event can't be guaranteed. Actually, if you look around scale model exhibitions, you could get the impression that most of the ground war was spent fuelling your Tiger tank. Or that most of the Battle of Britain was spent playing cards and lounging in deck chairs in the sun. A few burned out tanks here and there, but not a single corpse in sight. A triumphant ace having claimed his 100th victory, but no young pilot sitting in his shot-up 190, utterly exhausted, scared sh!tless and simply glad he survived taking on a box of B-17s.
Taking the last two examples, it's obvious that modelling has its limits. It's fairly easy to show the triumphant aces carried on the shoulders of his fellow airmen. It's obvious that something's being celebrated, even in a small scale. But a pilot suffering from combat exhaustion? That would be hard to do in very large scales, but in 1/48 or even 1/72? Next to impossible.
I remember a letter to the editor in a German modelling magazine complaining about the 1/35 model of a dead soldier (by Warriors, I think). The reader complained that modelling dead soldiers is tasteless. Well, it's a model for the WWII era. Millions of soldiers died. Is it tasteless to show the dead in a diorama or isn't it more tasteless to have countless dioramas that made the war look like a walk in the park? The general consensus was that it is tasteless to model the dead. And I think the dioramas seen in model shows mostly reflect that. Which, to my eyes, means that it's very hard to portray the war in scale modelling from even with the masters of trade at it, unable to provide the gruesome context of the war. And with a kit that is sold to kids, more or less a blank canvas, it's pretty much impossible to guarantee the background being reflected in sufficient depth. In that case it's better, I think, to forego the swastika and introduce it only when the proper background can be gained, rather than risk it becoming just another symbol.

Having said that, I certainly wouldn't criticise another modeller's decision not to use it if they felt uncomfortable with it, and in some contexts, particularly What If, I totally understand that discomfort. I once did a "role reversal" model of a British "last-ditch" rocket-fighter displayed in a Nazi museum after the latter had won the war, and did the write-up in the style of sneering, biased Nazi propagandistic magazine article. I was amazed at how uncomfortable and "dirty" I felt just writing it, even though it was entirely justifiable in the what-if historical context and the intention was clearly to make the reader shudder and think "there but for the grace of God....." . It's not an exercise I'll be repeating for fun any time soon. I think that when presenting a What If scenario involving Nazi Germany doing better than it did historically, there's a real risk of slipping from "what if?" into "if only...". I don't think What If modellers should avoid such scenarios, but I do think extra thought is advised when considering how to present them and in what context.

That's a really interesting point. I've had several Luft '46 builds planned, but I find that I'm more and more reluctant to actually build them. Mainly because I wouldn't like the context of another year of war and wouldn't have control over the context of the model.
It would just be the model of a He 177 Zwilling, flying from Norway in 1946. That's all you'd see in the diorama, with a sign denoting the type, airfield and year. That's what people would see. I could have an elaborate story of the pilot and navigator smoking a few cigarettes in the morning, just before embarking on a bombing mission, and chatting. The pilot could be the disillusioned type, thinking Hitler's a (very naughty word), that the war was already lost from the outset, that he's sad the 20th of July 1944 bomb didn't blow Hitler to bits, anything. It would work as a story, as a book or comic, but as a 1/72 model? People would just see a model of a Luftwaffe bomber, obviously aimed at bombing Britain. And in 1946, meaning that somewhere along the line, something must have horribly gone wrong for the Allies, Moscow reached, Rommel succeeding in Egypt, D-Day fought off, submarines successfully cutting off Britain, you name it. On top of that, all the ramifications of giving Nazi ideology another year to kill, torture or imprison, even if the Nazis would then lose the war in 1946.

[Weaver]

Hi ChernayaAkula: thoughtful and thought-provoking post - cheers.

I guess that what it comes down to (and I think we're going to have to agree to disagree on this point) is that I simply don't buy into the idea of this "normalising" effect being real or significant. Symbols only matter when people know what they mean, and for the swastika, society in general provides ample context. In the unlikely event of anyone seeing a swastika who doesn't know what it is, they're going to be able to find out real quick. I think this is also the answer to the question of context for models. Such models are only going to be seen at model shows or on websites and the people who see them are all members of the wider society that gives them context. If (highly likely) the viewer knows what a swastika means anyway, then seeing one on the fin of a 1940's German aircraft is simply correct labelling. If they don't know what it means (highly unlikely) then it doesn't matter whether it's there or not because it will have no effect on them either way.

On the other hand, pieces of well-intentioned but ill-thought-out petty censorship like this can have a damaging effect, because they allow those who would use the symbol for evil purposes to wrap themselves in the flag of free-speech and claim persecution. "Look!" they say, "These 'democrats' are hypocrits! They claim to protect free speech, but as soon as you use it to say something they don't like, they shut you up, just like the regimes they claim to be better than!" This is complete BS of course, but it's an easy propaganda "win" handed to them on a plate.

By analogy, I know plenty of people with various degrees of racist views who are far too smart to ever use the "n-word" in public. Banning it's use didn't stop them being racist: it just made them harder to identify and argue with. It also increased their sense of righteous persecution and belonging with other racists (nothing brings a community together like a sense of external threat).

There is another negative effect too: by defining the swastika (or any other symbol) in law as a symbol of Naziism, you "fix" it's interpretation, and guarantee neo-Nazis the exclusive rights to it forever. It precludes any possibility of taking it away from them, re-defining it or de-constructing it. It was a positive symbol for thousands of years until the Nazis got their hands on it, but any possibility of getting back to that state of affairs is precluded by bans that prevent the very people you want to be manipulating and playing with it (anti-Nazi catoonists, artists etc..) from doing so.


Regarding the sunject of taste in modelling, I find myself firmly on the sides of the realists. I have no problem with somebody making a diorama with dead bodies in it, or even with that (East European?) modeller who made a diorama of SS troops executing civilians. I think such things are a neccessary antidote to, and reality check for, all those models of "cool" paper panzers with their "smart" crews lounging around playing cards, reminding people of what those smart crews would have been doing with their cool hardware when they were back on the clock.

I also think that the sense of offence in both swastika and general modelling issues is very selective and parochial. Nobody seems to object to Imperial Japanese markings on models, even though Japan behaved every bit as appallingly as Germany in WWII and has made far less convincing attempts to apologise and make recompense. Likewise, any offence that Soviet stars might cause to victims of the gulags seems to be regarded as trivial. I've often wondered what would happen if an Iraqi came onto the site, complaining that a model of a Tornado with a Paveway hanging off it offended him, because his family were killed by one only a few years ago? Would all such models be immedately removed, or would he be given short shrift? I strongly suspect the latter.

In general, I think the "offense-response" in society as a whole has now been exaggerated to ridiculous levels, partly as a result of the offence-equivalent of ambulance-chasing lawyers, who have given people the idea that they can sue for discrimination and emotional trauma if somebody remarks that their farts smell bad... We need to grow thicker skins and accept that the price, well worth paying, of living in a free-speech society is that you will sometimes see and hear things that you don't like or agree with. The correct response to such things is to use that free speech to argue agains the things you don't like, not to campaign to remove that right from your opponents so that you don't have to.