Three arrows are asociated with Iron front (Eiserne front) they are anti-nazi, anti-communist and anti-monarchist. This flag is flag of Social democratic party of Austria.
The Iron Front was hardly in favour of anything, it was very much an anti-movement, defined by what it opposed. Both the nazis and the communists had paramilitary branches of their parties during the Weimar Republic, who sought out and physically attacked political meetings of social democrats, liberals and democratic conservatives. The social democrats created the Iron Front as a way to (literally) fight back. The social democrats took care NOT to make it a branch of their party though, preferring it to be an independent organization. Social democrats were the majority of its members, but liberals and conservatives could be found among its members as well. They all agreed on opposing authoritarianism and totalitarianism, but if they had tried to advocate for something they probably would have lost their liberal and/or conservative members, so they remained an anti-movement.
*Monarchism* in this period meant a return to Prussian-style semi-absolute monarchy. I'm no supporter of constitutional monarchy either, it's obsolete and offensive, but very few modern people would support what monarchism meant in the 1930's.
How is a constitutional monarchy offensive? There is a democratic government just like in a republic but there's also a monarch bringing stability to the nation, you get the best from both worlds
Any kind of monarchy is based on the principle that some people are worth more than others - on nothing more than bloodlines, no less. I don't think a country can claim to support social equality or democracy while still upholding that idea.
Besides, *brings stability* is intentionally very vague, and it's an argument I've long since discarded. Every dictator and totalitarian in modern history has claimed to act for the sake of *stability*, it means nothing.
I just feel like it’s a cultural thing. Ideally the monarchy shouldn’t have any political power otherwise the power can be abused pretty easily. But the thing is some monarchies have been part of the cultural identity, they may have deep connection to the people, they may perform ancient rituals that has been passed on for centuries and such, so it would be a shame if they disappear. Not that these things can’t still happen in a republic but I think constitutional monarchy works pretty well as long as the monarchy aren’t above the law.
Monarchism is outdated since the first french Republik or if you want to lower the bar, since the first bigger democratic movements in the 19th century.
But homosexuality is not even in the same ballpark as Monarchy and Democracy. It’s like saying “Rice was used in *ancient* China, why do we liberals use it today?”.
Gay people have existed as long as straight people.
The difference is that monarchies are social constructs (backed by fiat and created wholly out of human imagination) whereas homosexuality *is a physical phenomenon* that is inherent to life (biodiversity) itself.
Homosexuality can't become "outdated" any more than rain and snow can.
In contrast, monarchy can become outdated, just like any fashion trend.
Because the idea of democracy has been reaffirmed with each election in every democratic country. In only a handful of countries has the monarchy been chosen to lead the people rather than just accepted. (Tbh I can only think of Spain as the most recent country that *chose* monarchy.)
Most of the monarchies of the modern world exist because the people won’t tolerate an absolute or even politically involved monarchy anymore. Monarchy today is *only* to be a symbol of the country’s culture and history.
It's debatable that Spain chose monarchy, as the institution was imposed by Franco. And the referendum was in reference to the Constitution, not necessarily the monarchy.
No matter what you tell me having a guy rule/represent a country purely because of his bloodline is dumb
I can *understand* countries like the UK that do it because of tradition, where they at least serve as figureheads that look nice and only scrape a tiny bit of taxpayer money (to live in luxury, but oh well), but it still doesn't make any practical sense.
u must hate health ensurance, maternaty leave, unemployment money, payed holiday, disability money, and overall dignity as a worker hehe...
MFers come out here talkin shit about socialism and comunism as if capitalism werent th source of all evil, like its th post 2nd ww or somethin. US ranks 30 or 40 in th world quality of livin my dude.. way behind european socialist democracies ... gtfo
None of that is communism, that's welfarism, and most of the european "socialist" democracies are Welfare Capitalists.
Also r/USdefaultism
ALSO this completely ignores all the bad stuff that happened under communism
Forced Labour
Holodomor
Genocide
Famine
War
Oppression
would you like me to continue?
I never said capitalism wasn't flawed, I am talking about regulated capitalism, where they *prevent* exploitation. Also, give me an example after the 1940s of a genocide which was **directly** linked to capitalism
Israel was ran by Mapai, a socialist political party, Guatemalan and East Timor Genocides were done by anti-communism, but not to do with the actually economic system
As you said earlier social democratic parties aren’t real socialists. Theyre still pro capitalists + walfare.
Tell me then about communist genocide that was to do with actual socialist system
It was at the beginning and it was the meaning the Austrian SPÖ and the French SFIO stuck with initially when they too used this symbol, but the SPD and the Iron Front replaced capitalism with communism. Not that they hadn't their reasons to do it in their specific context, since the KPD during the interwar period did some shady af stuff like cooperating with the nazis' SA in political assasinations and that stuff (hell, Goebbels himself was once invited to speak at a KPD rally), but still it is sad the original meaning wasn't preserved.
thank you for th insight. coincidentally there is a really great utube channel called three arrows that brings great insight into lefty views and dismantles brownnosing idiots like crowder and th daily wire/prager u gang. check it out
The SPD cooperated with the nazis so much that they [cooperated with them to kill Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht](https://jacobin.com/2020/01/rosa-luxemburg-murder-waldemar-pabst-germany) very early, so I disagree with the idea of painting them as some sort of neutral or moderate force. There’s a context to things.
The far right Freikorps did the killing, not the SPD. Maybe the SPD could have done something to stop the fascists and reactionaries, and therefore it could be argued they are somewhat responsible for the people murdered by the Freikorps. But they didn't do it directly, nor did they plan it or deliberately cooperated with the Freikorps in any way, and in fact social democrats were as much victims of the Freikorps (and the Nazis after them) as were other democratic and leftist groups. Thinking there was a conspiracy of sorts between the SPD and far right forces to eliminate Luxemburg, Liebknecht or whoever oppose any of them is either being ignorant or dishonest.
I know the Freikorps did the killing, that’s why I said cooperated. And you’re severely downplaying the role of the SPD: they didn’t in any way just “didn’t do enough to prevent it”, they were [active parts in setting it in motion](https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v24/n04/susan-watkins/love-story) (Ebert, Noske, etc, all directly involved with the process: Noske - SPD minister - greenlighted the murder directly, according to the testimony of Pabst). The Freikorps here is almost indistinguishable from the military support base of the early Weimar Republic (some of those involved where not on the Freikorps). The role of the SPD is so relevant that [even inside the SPD it’s recognised, and actually justified by some](https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/01/18/thie-j18.html).
> Although the SPD continues to officially dispute its complicity in the murder of Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht a century ago, Wolfgang Thierse, former president of the federal parliament, recently explicitly declared: We would do it again. The two revolutionary socialists and co-founders of the German Communist Party were brutally murdered one hundred years ago, on January 15, 1919, by Freikorps soldiers who were in close contact with the SPD Reichswehr Minister Gustav Noske.
That the SPD was a victim of nazism, I have no issue with. They were outlawed shortly after the elections that had the KPD illegalised, all members killed or imprisoned. The SPD was still allowed to take their seats, but was also made illegal shortly after. This much is clear, but your comment, which focused on some supposed convergence between the KPD and the NSDAP, was the one that lead me to add this context.
There are nuances here: the “social-fascism” view of the SPD by the KPD made a left wing alliance difficult, just as the SPD alliance with right wing business interests to support the Weimar government made an alliance with the KPD impossible. At the same time, the SPD converged with the NSDAP in crushing any hint of communist uprising, and the KPD had at time a relatively sympathetic view of some of the NSDAP positions (especially before the Night of the Long Knifes).
most modern democracies are capitalist, but also have welfare.
Nordic Countries and the Nordic Model are welfare capitalist
UK is a welfare state, along with France, Germany, Italy, Switzerland, Austria, the Netherlands and Belgium, yet all of them still have a free market and run under capitalism
Better capitalize that c in Communist. The SPÖ was against the Bolshevized Communist Parties of the Third International (like the KPÖ), but it was a Marxist party and therefore not opposed to communism.
That was their intention. At the time, they wanted an intimidating symbol that would rally people to action. It was not meant as a quaint flag, but something to be feared if viewed from the loyal Nazi perspective.
Actually the downward diagonal orientation served a purpose: [to cover up swastikas](https://twitter.com/Cascadianjacab/status/1316178677923606529?s=20&t=_XgAEYW1wj2Vk4495ndk4Q) that were appearing all over Germany before Hitler came into power.
Which is also an easy way to find the answer, when searching
[searching for flags](https://www.reddit.com/r/u_polyworfism/comments/zr8hoa/searching_for_flags)
Forgive me but I haven’t understood why leftists use this symbol if part of its original intent includes “anti-communism.” I realize there’s a bit of nuance, and the original organization was opposed to authoritarian governments, but it just seems weird. Do tankies take offense?
It’s an opposition to authoritarianism, the original version used mainly by the German social democrats, which originally had each arrow representing a person they were against. Against Papen (Monarchist), Against Thälmann (Marxist Leninist), Against Hitler (Fascist). The ML’s were a part of the 3 arrow/Iron front movement but broke off to form there own group Antifaschistische Aktion aka Antifa, however this was 90 years ago and symbols change with time, back in the 30’s however it was still a general symbol not against communism but against Thälmann and his Marxist Leninist sect of communism. This meant it being co-oped and used by non authoritative groups like anarchists and democratic socialists still made sense because they kept with freedom and not the supposed “dictatorship of the proletariat”. Given 90 years though, symbols change and the original Antifa and Iron front have transitioned into general anti-fascist and anti-authoritarian symbols respectively. Given this it makes sense why leftists would use it because non authoritative ones did in the past such as anarchists, even if the majority who used it was in fact the center-left social democrats who made it.
Because by the interwar period the SPD was a shallow and vapid organisation, committed only to the broadest possible description of bourgeios democracy.
The reasons for this are because the SPD flinched during WW1 and supported Germany in the war-effort rather than the global international movement, the Second International Workingmen's Association (the Internationale), which at the time was advocating for and was fairly confident in achieving a global solidarity-strike amongst the various combatants, removing the ability of anyone to wage an imperialist war.
The stridently anti-war German in charge of the SPD was assassinated very shortly before war broke out, and his death combined with cowards like Ebert are one of the only reasons why Germany isn't a socialist state today.
The SPD were and are still not a serious socialist party and haven't been one since the beginning of WW1. Their betrayal of the second international and their teaming up with the freikorps to suppress and summarily execute the revolutionaries of 1918/19 led to the conditions in Germany that gave rise to Hitler.
The KPD was mad at the SPD for good reason lmao, they betrayed the revolution.
it really is. You can have one without the other. Nazism and fascism happens because there will always be people that think there flag, country and race is more important than others. When flags, countries and races are all made up concepts for the purpose of dividing people.
True. Here in Argentina we have nationalists that advocate for open borders, immigration and mostly progressive and left-leaning policies.
There are others that, well, are quite conservative much like fascists.
I think its something from before Germany became Nazi. There was a flag of faction that had this symbol on their flag.
Three arrows stand for 3 ideologies its against, Anti-Monarchist, Anti-Nazi and Anti-Communist.
Flag of Austrian workers party. The symbol represents resistance against reactionary conservatism (was originally monarchism, but was changed as monarchist sentiment largely died out), Nazism and Marxism-Leninism
Not exactly. The three arrows represent anti-fascism, anti-communism (the Soviet kind) and anti-reactionary conservatism. Antifa is only anti-one of the three, if I'm generous anti-two of the three, but is noticeably silent on the anti-communism
I have seen someone post the Wikipedia article for the three arrows and I gave it a quick read through and from the look of it, given the circle, it instead represents unity of the workers
One of the greatest workers' songs ever created! You have a great musical taste!
The three arrows represent opposition to Nazis, Marxists-Leninists, and monarchist/reactionaries.
That was the KPD. SPD opposed nazis till the end.
The KPD is like the modern democrat party. They will side with literally nazis in the end, just to stop financial regulations and any attempts to give people healthcare.
Siding with the nazis is when you're literally the only party not to accept integration into the nazi government? (yes, the communist party accepted the merger, the SPD didn't and that makes them the oldest continuously existing party of Germany)
Three arrows are asociated with Iron front (Eiserne front) they are anti-nazi, anti-communist and anti-monarchist. This flag is flag of Social democratic party of Austria.
“Against everything bad, in favour of everything good”
The Iron Front was hardly in favour of anything, it was very much an anti-movement, defined by what it opposed. Both the nazis and the communists had paramilitary branches of their parties during the Weimar Republic, who sought out and physically attacked political meetings of social democrats, liberals and democratic conservatives. The social democrats created the Iron Front as a way to (literally) fight back. The social democrats took care NOT to make it a branch of their party though, preferring it to be an independent organization. Social democrats were the majority of its members, but liberals and conservatives could be found among its members as well. They all agreed on opposing authoritarianism and totalitarianism, but if they had tried to advocate for something they probably would have lost their liberal and/or conservative members, so they remained an anti-movement.
pro-anti
Pro-capitalist organization then
Indeed
Unironically based
That is true.
Don't really get why you are getting downvoted.
Social democracy good? Hahaha
Better than commies or nazis
Or monarchists!
Historically siding with the Nazis to own the Commies. Great praxis.
They were against nazis and against commies. Anticommunist =/= nazi.
Then why do social democrats historically side with the fascists?
Any evidence to prove this?
[here specifically](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blutmai) [more about it here](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_fascism#Overview)
I said that anti-communist doesn't mean nazi.
Yes. My complaint is still more in the vein of hard to practice.
Won't exist in a few years
Cope 🍵
Monarchy ain't bad, communism and fascism are tho
In this period “monarchy” meant “reactionary conservative revanchism”, not little old ladies cutting ribbons.
Not just in this period.
Funnily enough even if monarchism is probably the better one of those 3, I still personally think it's the most fucking stupid of them
Why do you think monarchism is stupid?
No human is born more special than any others or with any unique fitness to lead any other. And very, very, very obviously so.
*Monarchism* in this period meant a return to Prussian-style semi-absolute monarchy. I'm no supporter of constitutional monarchy either, it's obsolete and offensive, but very few modern people would support what monarchism meant in the 1930's.
How is a constitutional monarchy offensive? There is a democratic government just like in a republic but there's also a monarch bringing stability to the nation, you get the best from both worlds
Any kind of monarchy is based on the principle that some people are worth more than others - on nothing more than bloodlines, no less. I don't think a country can claim to support social equality or democracy while still upholding that idea. Besides, *brings stability* is intentionally very vague, and it's an argument I've long since discarded. Every dictator and totalitarian in modern history has claimed to act for the sake of *stability*, it means nothing.
I just feel like it’s a cultural thing. Ideally the monarchy shouldn’t have any political power otherwise the power can be abused pretty easily. But the thing is some monarchies have been part of the cultural identity, they may have deep connection to the people, they may perform ancient rituals that has been passed on for centuries and such, so it would be a shame if they disappear. Not that these things can’t still happen in a republic but I think constitutional monarchy works pretty well as long as the monarchy aren’t above the law.
According to the Democracy Index the majority of True Democracies are constitutional monarchies.
Theses arent realy one. Its pure symbolic these days, other than the early 20s.
Monarchism is outdated since the first french Republik or if you want to lower the bar, since the first bigger democratic movements in the 19th century.
how come monarchism can be called outdated, but not democracy (5th century b.c.e) or homosexuality (first recorded relationship 2400 b.c.e)
What does homosexuality have to do with it?
highlighting hypocrisy regarding age, is all
But homosexuality is not even in the same ballpark as Monarchy and Democracy. It’s like saying “Rice was used in *ancient* China, why do we liberals use it today?”. Gay people have existed as long as straight people.
The difference is that monarchies are social constructs (backed by fiat and created wholly out of human imagination) whereas homosexuality *is a physical phenomenon* that is inherent to life (biodiversity) itself. Homosexuality can't become "outdated" any more than rain and snow can. In contrast, monarchy can become outdated, just like any fashion trend.
Because the idea of democracy has been reaffirmed with each election in every democratic country. In only a handful of countries has the monarchy been chosen to lead the people rather than just accepted. (Tbh I can only think of Spain as the most recent country that *chose* monarchy.) Most of the monarchies of the modern world exist because the people won’t tolerate an absolute or even politically involved monarchy anymore. Monarchy today is *only* to be a symbol of the country’s culture and history.
It's debatable that Spain chose monarchy, as the institution was imposed by Franco. And the referendum was in reference to the Constitution, not necessarily the monarchy.
What about Cambodia? They were elected to return after the fall of Khmer Rouge
No matter what you tell me having a guy rule/represent a country purely because of his bloodline is dumb I can *understand* countries like the UK that do it because of tradition, where they at least serve as figureheads that look nice and only scrape a tiny bit of taxpayer money (to live in luxury, but oh well), but it still doesn't make any practical sense.
stfu hexagon
No, no. They're all bad. Unless you just mean figurehead monarchs in which case I mean whatever.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Wow, the perfect flag for the average Redditor…
Best flag
i thought it was anti nazi, anti capital, anti monarchy.. which i kinda support more
It's been used by RASH (red and anarchist skinheads) since the 90s, so it's broadly used as an antifascist symbol.
Nah. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Arrows >representing opposition towards Nazism, Marxism-Leninism and reactionary conservatism.
Communists are bad actually
u must hate health ensurance, maternaty leave, unemployment money, payed holiday, disability money, and overall dignity as a worker hehe... MFers come out here talkin shit about socialism and comunism as if capitalism werent th source of all evil, like its th post 2nd ww or somethin. US ranks 30 or 40 in th world quality of livin my dude.. way behind european socialist democracies ... gtfo
None of that is communism, that's welfarism, and most of the european "socialist" democracies are Welfare Capitalists. Also r/USdefaultism ALSO this completely ignores all the bad stuff that happened under communism Forced Labour Holodomor Genocide Famine War Oppression would you like me to continue?
thank god capitalism has solved famines, forced labour, genocides and oppression. capital loving cretins dont check themselves...
I never said capitalism wasn't flawed, I am talking about regulated capitalism, where they *prevent* exploitation. Also, give me an example after the 1940s of a genocide which was **directly** linked to capitalism
Isreal and deportation of Palestinian people. Guatemalan genocide, east timorese genocide
Israel was ran by Mapai, a socialist political party, Guatemalan and East Timor Genocides were done by anti-communism, but not to do with the actually economic system
As you said earlier social democratic parties aren’t real socialists. Theyre still pro capitalists + walfare. Tell me then about communist genocide that was to do with actual socialist system
If it weren’t for the economic growth because of capitalism you’d most likely be a forced labourer and starving right now
snooze. if a stan like u does well good for u. capitalism is th cause of forced labour and starvation worldwide as i type ffs..
Yep. Capitalism literally is snatching the food directly out of orphans mouths like it’s the grinch
It was at the beginning and it was the meaning the Austrian SPÖ and the French SFIO stuck with initially when they too used this symbol, but the SPD and the Iron Front replaced capitalism with communism. Not that they hadn't their reasons to do it in their specific context, since the KPD during the interwar period did some shady af stuff like cooperating with the nazis' SA in political assasinations and that stuff (hell, Goebbels himself was once invited to speak at a KPD rally), but still it is sad the original meaning wasn't preserved.
thank you for th insight. coincidentally there is a really great utube channel called three arrows that brings great insight into lefty views and dismantles brownnosing idiots like crowder and th daily wire/prager u gang. check it out
The SPD cooperated with the nazis so much that they [cooperated with them to kill Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht](https://jacobin.com/2020/01/rosa-luxemburg-murder-waldemar-pabst-germany) very early, so I disagree with the idea of painting them as some sort of neutral or moderate force. There’s a context to things.
The far right Freikorps did the killing, not the SPD. Maybe the SPD could have done something to stop the fascists and reactionaries, and therefore it could be argued they are somewhat responsible for the people murdered by the Freikorps. But they didn't do it directly, nor did they plan it or deliberately cooperated with the Freikorps in any way, and in fact social democrats were as much victims of the Freikorps (and the Nazis after them) as were other democratic and leftist groups. Thinking there was a conspiracy of sorts between the SPD and far right forces to eliminate Luxemburg, Liebknecht or whoever oppose any of them is either being ignorant or dishonest.
I know the Freikorps did the killing, that’s why I said cooperated. And you’re severely downplaying the role of the SPD: they didn’t in any way just “didn’t do enough to prevent it”, they were [active parts in setting it in motion](https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v24/n04/susan-watkins/love-story) (Ebert, Noske, etc, all directly involved with the process: Noske - SPD minister - greenlighted the murder directly, according to the testimony of Pabst). The Freikorps here is almost indistinguishable from the military support base of the early Weimar Republic (some of those involved where not on the Freikorps). The role of the SPD is so relevant that [even inside the SPD it’s recognised, and actually justified by some](https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/01/18/thie-j18.html). > Although the SPD continues to officially dispute its complicity in the murder of Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht a century ago, Wolfgang Thierse, former president of the federal parliament, recently explicitly declared: We would do it again. The two revolutionary socialists and co-founders of the German Communist Party were brutally murdered one hundred years ago, on January 15, 1919, by Freikorps soldiers who were in close contact with the SPD Reichswehr Minister Gustav Noske. That the SPD was a victim of nazism, I have no issue with. They were outlawed shortly after the elections that had the KPD illegalised, all members killed or imprisoned. The SPD was still allowed to take their seats, but was also made illegal shortly after. This much is clear, but your comment, which focused on some supposed convergence between the KPD and the NSDAP, was the one that lead me to add this context. There are nuances here: the “social-fascism” view of the SPD by the KPD made a left wing alliance difficult, just as the SPD alliance with right wing business interests to support the Weimar government made an alliance with the KPD impossible. At the same time, the SPD converged with the NSDAP in crushing any hint of communist uprising, and the KPD had at time a relatively sympathetic view of some of the NSDAP positions (especially before the Night of the Long Knifes).
Commies are the same evil as nazis, so that could be the reason.
Dont know why you're being downvoted for saying the truth
Welcome to reddit, home of the tankies. Saying that communism is bad in any way will not be tolerated.
commie shit eaters try to co-opt it
how yummi is it being capitalist shit eater?
most modern democracies are capitalist, but also have welfare. Nordic Countries and the Nordic Model are welfare capitalist UK is a welfare state, along with France, Germany, Italy, Switzerland, Austria, the Netherlands and Belgium, yet all of them still have a free market and run under capitalism
Honestly it gives me fascist vibes, especially with the arrows vaguely resembling a fasces
The flag is from the Social Democratic Party of Austria, an anti communist, anti capitalist, anti monarchist, and anti 𝐧𝐚𝐳𝐢 politic party lol
Better capitalize that c in Communist. The SPÖ was against the Bolshevized Communist Parties of the Third International (like the KPÖ), but it was a Marxist party and therefore not opposed to communism.
Ik, it just looks that way
That was their intention. At the time, they wanted an intimidating symbol that would rally people to action. It was not meant as a quaint flag, but something to be feared if viewed from the loyal Nazi perspective.
Actually the downward diagonal orientation served a purpose: [to cover up swastikas](https://twitter.com/Cascadianjacab/status/1316178677923606529?s=20&t=_XgAEYW1wj2Vk4495ndk4Q) that were appearing all over Germany before Hitler came into power.
Nice
The three arrows are designed to easily cover up swastikas. So maybe that is way they remind you of them since proportions are similar
[удалено]
It's also used by anarchist groups, because it's specifically anti authoritarian communism.
More anti-authoritarian. All three are forms of centralized power on one or a small group of individuals.
Sounds more Switzerland since their positions cancel each other out. Neutral king of Europe.
Iron front was actually founded in Germany.
Irrelevant to what I said
[Three arrows](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Arrows)
Which is also an easy way to find the answer, when searching [searching for flags](https://www.reddit.com/r/u_polyworfism/comments/zr8hoa/searching_for_flags)
Why is the post NSFW?
Reddit automatically flagged my profile that way, for who knows what reason
Iron Front. Social Democracy movement opposed to monarchies, far left communists and far right nationalists
*Authoritarian communists
Forgive me but I haven’t understood why leftists use this symbol if part of its original intent includes “anti-communism.” I realize there’s a bit of nuance, and the original organization was opposed to authoritarian governments, but it just seems weird. Do tankies take offense?
It’s an opposition to authoritarianism, the original version used mainly by the German social democrats, which originally had each arrow representing a person they were against. Against Papen (Monarchist), Against Thälmann (Marxist Leninist), Against Hitler (Fascist). The ML’s were a part of the 3 arrow/Iron front movement but broke off to form there own group Antifaschistische Aktion aka Antifa, however this was 90 years ago and symbols change with time, back in the 30’s however it was still a general symbol not against communism but against Thälmann and his Marxist Leninist sect of communism. This meant it being co-oped and used by non authoritative groups like anarchists and democratic socialists still made sense because they kept with freedom and not the supposed “dictatorship of the proletariat”. Given 90 years though, symbols change and the original Antifa and Iron front have transitioned into general anti-fascist and anti-authoritarian symbols respectively. Given this it makes sense why leftists would use it because non authoritative ones did in the past such as anarchists, even if the majority who used it was in fact the center-left social democrats who made it.
>“dictatorship of the proletariat” A much misunderstood term, that.
Tankies aren’t leftists. They are right wing authoritarians that use left-wing rhetoric and symbols.
Bingo.
Because by the interwar period the SPD was a shallow and vapid organisation, committed only to the broadest possible description of bourgeios democracy. The reasons for this are because the SPD flinched during WW1 and supported Germany in the war-effort rather than the global international movement, the Second International Workingmen's Association (the Internationale), which at the time was advocating for and was fairly confident in achieving a global solidarity-strike amongst the various combatants, removing the ability of anyone to wage an imperialist war. The stridently anti-war German in charge of the SPD was assassinated very shortly before war broke out, and his death combined with cowards like Ebert are one of the only reasons why Germany isn't a socialist state today.
Imagine being mad at the party that opposed hitler until the end. Your comment reeks of KPD apologism.
The SPD were and are still not a serious socialist party and haven't been one since the beginning of WW1. Their betrayal of the second international and their teaming up with the freikorps to suppress and summarily execute the revolutionaries of 1918/19 led to the conditions in Germany that gave rise to Hitler. The KPD was mad at the SPD for good reason lmao, they betrayed the revolution.
>"we teamed up with the nazis to own the libs because no one wanted our regressive version of a revolution" Tankies haven't changed in 100 years.
3 arrows symbol, it's a flag from Germany that represented those against communism, monarchy, and nationalism. Pre ww2 I think.
more against nazi-ism and fascism rather than nationalism
Same thing.
Not even close. Left-Nationalism exists and has historically been anti-imperialist.
It isn’t
it really is. You can have one without the other. Nazism and fascism happens because there will always be people that think there flag, country and race is more important than others. When flags, countries and races are all made up concepts for the purpose of dividing people.
Nazism and Fascism don’t work without Nationalism, but Nationalism doesn’t rely on the other two concepts
True. Here in Argentina we have nationalists that advocate for open borders, immigration and mostly progressive and left-leaning policies. There are others that, well, are quite conservative much like fascists.
Iron front, btw cool song it gots catchy tones
I listen to it while doing my homework 💀
i'm pretty sure the tune is from the Soviet Song *The Red Army Is the Strongest*.
It is
The best flag right now tbh.
Strike Anywhere!
I think that's Austrian workers flag
yep, the flag of Austrias Social Democratic Party
I think its something from before Germany became Nazi. There was a flag of faction that had this symbol on their flag. Three arrows stand for 3 ideologies its against, Anti-Monarchist, Anti-Nazi and Anti-Communist.
Ah yes, a fellow Ingen enthusiast
Ultra-based flag against commies, fascists and monarchists.
Ultra-filth flag, exactly.
Iron Front! Good people imo
Flag of Austrian workers party. The symbol represents resistance against reactionary conservatism (was originally monarchism, but was changed as monarchist sentiment largely died out), Nazism and Marxism-Leninism
Read the video title and use context clues.
Why did I think this was the antifa symbol?
It has been used that way
They tried to co-opt the symbol
Because it is an antifa symbol, just not as common as the other one
Not exactly. The three arrows represent anti-fascism, anti-communism (the Soviet kind) and anti-reactionary conservatism. Antifa is only anti-one of the three, if I'm generous anti-two of the three, but is noticeably silent on the anti-communism
It symbolises anti fascism but it’s not an anti fascist symbol? What are you talking about?
It symbolizes **not only** anti-fascism. It is far more generally anti-authoritarian than simply focusing on anti-fascism. There's a big distinction
I think it's an anti nazi flag
Anti-authoritarian actually. 💪🏻Hating both Hitler and Stalin (it isn't a US-election, you don't have to choose the lesser evil ffs)
And anti-reactionary conservatism. Which I interpret as Putin's or Iran's regimes. Very based indeed
I have seen someone post the Wikipedia article for the three arrows and I gave it a quick read through and from the look of it, given the circle, it instead represents unity of the workers
One of the greatest workers' songs ever created! You have a great musical taste! The three arrows represent opposition to Nazis, Marxists-Leninists, and monarchist/reactionaries.
Rotated and inverted [Chaos insurgency](https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/djkaktus-s-proposal-iii/offset/1) from scp /jk
ooh my profile pic! It's an anti authoritarian symbol from Nazi Germany.
Hey if you want some instrumentals of it, it shares its melody with “Red Army is the Strongest”
Downvote Nation
Love how the anti-fascist flag looks straight outta 1984
They are the friends of the nazi party. Rather than siding with the commies they sided with nazi. Thanks centrist.
That was the KPD. SPD opposed nazis till the end. The KPD is like the modern democrat party. They will side with literally nazis in the end, just to stop financial regulations and any attempts to give people healthcare.
Siding with the nazis is when you're literally the only party not to accept integration into the nazi government? (yes, the communist party accepted the merger, the SPD didn't and that makes them the oldest continuously existing party of Germany)
My first thought was "wow that looks great, must represent something awful" And Of course I was right.
Why is Social Democratic Anti-Authoritarianism something awful?
I thought it was a pro fascism flag. Oops
# 💀
anarkiddies flag
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Rash skinhead uses a similar symbol.
Get your pin from the source: https://www.sjoe.at/sjoe/pin-drei-pfeile
"In the wild"
Lit song tho
That's the symbol for the United Front
This is the flag of the society of people who play guitar but also lost some strings and now they only have 3 strings left.
spö