128 replies to this topic

[Sephodwyrm]

Well, the Chinese dragons were "derived" from pigs, fish or alligators, I believe.
I wouldn't mind discussions about it. But suggesting a state to remove a successful icon may be evidence of dope overuse, I believe.

In any case, 1/12 of the Chinese (perhaps a bit more than 1/12) were born in the Year of the Dragon.
Some people still worship dragons, believing them to control the elements.
And we also do have dragon boat races, and I think these have more to do with emperors.
I believe it is more cultural, spiritual and religious then simply being a dynastic symbol or icon.

So its perhaps likened to asking Christians to give up the imagery of Jesus Christ being nailed because it looked as if they like people being tortured.

[Yun]

On the giant panda and it possible connection to the Pixiu and the Mo (which I am doubtful of), see http://www.chinahist...p...53&hl=panda

Some people still worship dragons, believing them to control the elements.

Yes, and this worship used to be far more widespread in rural communities.

And we also do have dragon boat races, and I think these have more to do with emperors.

On another recent thread, I mentioned that the dragon boat race probably started out as a religious ritual to dispel bad luck on a particularly 'unlucky' day of the year. When and how the dragon motif got mixed in with it is unclear.

So its perhaps likened to asking Christians to give up the imagery of Jesus Christ being nailed because it looked as if they like people being tortured.

I would probably liken it more to the uneasiness among Jews, Muslims, and possibly Hindus and Buddhists living in the UK if the British government chose to make the Cross of Saint George a much more visible national symbol throughout the country. Of course, the Union Jack is actually three crosses on a single flag (forming an 'asterisk'), but that kind of makes the cross element less obvious.

[Prince of the South]

Knowing the Chinese peoples, it is hard, very hard ideed, to find a suitable icon to represent the Chinese, be it the dragon/loong, panda, or whatever, some Chinese somewhere will have an issue. Who knows, if a neutral yet suitable icon is found/created, some Chinese somewhere will probably have that worshipped in no time.

Personally, no issue with the dragon or loong, probably more suitable to represent China's imperial past / royal family. Panda? for tourism maybe.

[Sephodwyrm]

Personally, no issue with the dragon or loong, probably more suitable to represent China's imperial past / royal family. Panda? for tourism maybe.

Fact is, for at least 3 decades the dragon is always a popular cultural icon and its popularity is increasing. I don't see any reason to ditch this. Plus, the dragon not only represented the imperial household, but also minor deities, weather, rain and water elements. Its been around for at least three thousand years and I do not intend to let Euro-centric dragon-fearing (aka Sinophobic) attitude get away with more respect than it actually deserves.

I would probably liken it more to the uneasiness among Jews, Muslims, and possibly Hindus and Buddhists living in the UK if the British government chose to make the Cross of Saint George a much more visible national symbol throughout the country.

WRONG.
The comparison is in the opposite sense. Here we are discussing whether to drop the dragon as a cultural symbol, not making it a cultural symbol. Its already considered a cultural symbol.
If you want to get the comparison more in line you should have said whether it is appropriate for the UK to drop the Union Jack completely and go for the tri-colors that represent most of the countries in Europe, since the crosses on the Union Jack is not representative of cultural diversity.

Remember, the cross itself was an object of contention and arguments for a while in those days.

Edited by Sephodwyrm, 20 March 2007 - 04:14 PM.

[Publius]

WRONG.
The comparison is in the opposite sense. Here we are discussing whether to drop the dragon as a cultural symbol, not making it a cultural symbol. Its already considered a cultural symbol.
If you want to get the comparison more in line you should have said whether it is appropriate for the UK to drop the Union Jack completely and go for the tri-colors that represent most of the countries in Europe, since the crosses on the Union Jack is not representative of cultural diversity.

Remember, the cross itself was an object of contention and arguments for a while in those days.

I believe Yun is saying that a similar discussion/problem would exist "if" the Cross of Saint George was already established (say, 30 years) as a much more visible national symbol throughout the UK. This comparison is not wrong, but rather is hypothetical and compares this hypothetical to the present situation. Both compare a symbol representative to many of a country's inhabitants but may be offensive to others.

[Sephodwyrm]

Both compare a symbol representative to many of a country's inhabitants but may be offensive to others.

And how is the Dragon offensive?
There are other things I find offensive amongst Chinese people that they find representative (smoking, drinking and getting trophy wives).
And dragon is not one of them.

"if" the Cross of Saint George was already established (say, 30 years) as a much more visible national symbol throughout the UK.

The Cross is already in prominent use by the BNP and the KKK.
And they are already disturbing to ethnic and religious minorities.
The thing is that the dragon is nowhere as disturbing in the ways that they are being marketed.
I would object the use of the dragon is they are being used in this manner:


The Cross had been and is continued being used as a imperialist symbol. So I don't know why this tangent is applicable at all.
IMO, the Five Stars is far more imperialist than the Dragon, not to mention the Red Sun on the White.

Edited by Sephodwyrm, 20 March 2007 - 05:54 PM.

[Moon]

Source: Disappearing Customs of China

Among China’s legends, other than the story that depicts early man’s discovery of fire, stories about Fu Yi and Nu Wa are the most popular.

The ancient Chinese believed that Fu Yi was a transformation of the dragon, while Nu Wa was a transformation of a snake. In the Book Of Mountain and Sea, Nu Wa is portrayed as an ancient goddess with the body of a snake and the face of a woman.

The dragon is a universally recognized totem and symbol. In China, it is the largest among the four divine creatures. In ancient Chinese legends, many gods and deities were descendants of the dragon and the snake. Subsequently, the dragon also became a symbol of rulers in China. The ceremonial robes worn by rulers have dragon designs. The dragon flags that represented the sovereignty of the rulers were also decorated with dragon patterns. The palaces that ruler’s throne was called the dragon’s seat.

Among the people, the dragon dance had a significant place in spring festival celebrations. In olden times, the dragon dance was performed as a prayer for rain. In any case, the dragon has traditionally been endowed with positive qualities and ideologies. Through the dragon, as well as the snake, people expressed their passions, thoughts, beliefs and hopes.

In China, the dragon has become symbol of the people and the nation. China is like a rising dragon as it takes on a more significant role in the world stage.

[yarovit]

And how is the Dragon offensive?
There are other things I find offensive amongst Chinese people that they find representative (smoking, drinking and getting trophy wives).
And dragon is not one of them.
The Cross is already in prominent use by the BNP and the KKK.
And they are already disturbing to ethnic and religious minorities.
The thing is that the dragon is nowhere as disturbing in the ways that they are being marketed.
I would object the use of the dragon is they are being used in this manner:


The Cross had been and is continued being used as a imperialist symbol. So I don't know why this tangent is applicable at all.
IMO, the Five Stars is far more imperialist than the Dragon, not to mention the Red Sun on the White.

Why are you bullying so much on the cross? It’s a symbol which is deep rooted in European culture and history. And good folks as well as the bad guys used it. KKK (btw, it was always a tiny organization) used the cross, but hospitals and charities too. Indeed, horrible things were done under the sign of cross, but equally horrible things were done under crescent or shahada which are prominent symbols of Muslim countries or any other religious symbol (not even mentioning the ancient Indoeuropean swastika). But the fact that a bunch of sickos use this sign, it does not mean that it is cursed.

Speaking of UK - no one ever seriously though to change both Union Jack and the Cross of St. George except a handful of leftists. British press reacted by giving flags of UK and England as free additions to newspaper in defiance to this nonsense.

Edited by yarovit, 21 March 2007 - 10:43 PM.

[Mok]

Why are you bullying so much on the cross? It’s a symbol which is deep rooted in European culture and history. And good folks as well as the bad guys used it. KKK (btw, it was always a tiny organization) used the cross, but hospitals and charities too. Indeed, horrible things were done under the sign of cross, but equally horrible things were done under crescent or shahada which are prominent symbols of Muslim countries or any other religious symbol (not even mentioning the ancient Indoeuropean swastika). But the fact that a bunch of sickos use this sign, it does not mean that it is cursed.

Speaking of UK - no one ever seriously though to change both Union Jack and the Cross of St. George except a handful of leftists. British press reacted by giving flags of UK and England as free additions to newspaper in defiance to this nonsense.

Well said, yarovit! Finally a voice of reason and level-headedness here. I applaud you standing up and saying what needs to be said.

By the way...what does your signature mean?

[yarovit]

Well said, yarovit! Finally a voice of reason and level-headedness here. I applaud you standing up and saying what needs to be said.

By the way...what does your signature mean?

Thank you for your support. I am angered because of attitude of some folks who tend to blame Christianity for every evil of this world. Yet, how often they do not see the dirt in their own garden.

I do not subscibe to any religion, but this does not stop me from acknowledging the role of Christianity in development of the modern world - its contribution to science, culture and human charity.

Si Deus nobiscum quis contra Nos. means in Latin If God is with us, who shall be against us? It was a national motto of the medieval Kingsom of Poland and later the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, one of the world's oldest parliamentary states as well as European superpower of 16th and 17th centuries.
http://en.wikipedia....an_Commonwealth

[Mok]

Thank you for your support. I am angered because of attitude of some folks who tend to blame Christianity for every evil of this world. Yet, how often they do not see the dirt in their own garden.

I do not subscibe to any religion, but this does not stop me from acknowledging the role of Christianity in development of the modern world - its contribution to science, culture and human charity.

Si Deus nobiscum quis contra Nos. means in Latin If God is with us, who shall be against us? It was a national motto of the medieval Kingsom of Poland and later the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, one of the world's oldest parliamentary states as well as European superpower of 16th and 17th centuries.
http://en.wikipedia....an_Commonwealth

You're most welcome. I am a practising Christian, of the "new" school of Christian evangelism, etc. and it no doubt angers me too. However, to retain my objectivity as I am a Staff member, you will find that I very rarely engage in debates against Christianity, etc. So, for someone who is able to view Christianity in an academic/historic light and defend it as such, is a blessing for me.

Ah, that is my favourite Bible verse too...how wonderful to know it in Latin now!

Thanks!

P.S. I'll read the links more closely when I have time. They are interesting!

[kaiselin]

(Sephodwyrm @ Mar 20 2007, 04:54 PM)
And how is the Dragon offensive?
There are other things I find offensive amongst Chinese people that they find representative (smoking, drinking and getting trophy wives).
And dragon is not one of them.
The Cross is already in prominent use by the BNP and the KKK.
And they are already disturbing to ethnic and religious minorities.
The thing is that the dragon is nowhere as disturbing in the ways that they are being marketed.
I would object the use of the dragon is they are being used in this manner:


The Cross had been and is continued being used as a imperialist symbol. So I don't know why this tangent is applicable at all.
IMO, the Five Stars is far more imperialist than the Dragon, not to mention the Red Sun on the White.

my first reading of that post was..........KKK? wow, where did that come from? I had to re read the post .
after re reading the post a couple of times, I think that Sephodwyrm was saying that the cross too has been used in an vehicle to hide evil actions behind, but that does not mean that the whole of Christianity is evil.

(yarovit @ Mar 22 2007, 11:40 AM)
Why are you bullying so much on the cross? It’s a symbol which is deep rooted in European culture and history. And good folks as well as the bad guys used it. KKK (btw, it was always a tiny organization) used the cross, but hospitals and charities too. Indeed, horrible things were done under the sign of cross, but equally horrible things were done under crescent or shahada which are prominent symbols of Muslim countries or any other religious symbol (not even mentioning the ancient Indoeuropean swastika). But the fact that a bunch of sickos use this sign, it does not mean that it is cursed.

Speaking of UK - no one ever seriously though to change both Union Jack and the Cross of St. George except a handful of leftists. British press reacted by giving flags of UK and England as free additions to newspaper in defiance to this nonsense.

I don't think that attacking the cross is the subject of the earlier thread.
Although there are those that believe that the Dragon is an evil symbol are also Christian, that does not mean that to like the
dragon is to say that the cross is cursed.

I think that the comparison of the swastika and the dragon might to an better analogy. The Nazis use of the swastika has greatly harmed the meanings of the ancient symbol. there are so many ignorant people that do not know it as anything but a symbol of hate. How very unfortunate that is, but never the less in the west it will never be able to be used again without negative connotations being attached to it.
It seems that some branches of Christianity is trying to make all symbols of the dragon as evil.
When I first came on this web I read a post that aggressively stated that the Dragon was not the Long.At first I disagreed with that , I now can see why perhaps it is a shame that the Long is known as a Dragon. In western mythology the dragon has too often been portrayed as evil ,so by extension since the Long has similar features, it became known as a Dragon in the west. Would there be this discussion if it had been called the Long or something else not related to the western dragon?

Mok says she has no problem with the dragon as a cultural icon. I think she understands it is not being worshiped as an alternitive to Christianity.
I think she has a comfortable understanding with her Christian belief and is not threatened by a cultural symbol that she knows is not evil.

yarovit said:
Thank you for your support. I am angered because of attitude of some folks who tend to blame Christianity for every evil of this world. Yet, how often they do not see the dirt in their own garden.

Sadly I know far too many christians that can't see their own gardens either.

If my comments in earlier posts are want initiated these above statements, my intention was to criticize some harsh remarks that were gross overstatements about the west as if it were of one united front against the dragon. I was not attacking the whole of Christianity for every evil in this world. I have known some very good Christians , I would never criticize their beliefs or the kind acts they do.

I usually do not stand up in favor of Christianity, but I totally disagree with the idea that the Cross is an evil symbol as much as I do saying that the dragon is evil.

Edited by kaiselin, 22 March 2007 - 02:09 AM.

[Mok]

It seems that some branches of Christianity is trying to make all symbols of the dragon as evil.

To some Christians, the dragon is seen as belonging to the same reptilian/serpentine family as the snake that tempted Eve in the Garden of Eden. As such, the dragon (whether in its Western or Eastern incarnation) is deemed to be of the Devil (Evil One).

It doesn't help that there is a "God of Dragon" in Chinese mythology as well. Thus, many Christians avoid any association, even cultural association, with the dragon and what it stands for.

Mok says she has no problem with the dragon as a cultural icon. I think she understands it is not being worshiped as an alternitive to Christianity.

I think she has a comfortable understanding with her Christian belief and is not threatened by a cultural symbol that she knows is not evil.

To me, symbols are symbols with the very important exception of the cross. I know some Christians wear it around their necks as a sign of their devotion to Jesus, but sadly the cross has become more of a fashion accessory and many times, defamed by non-Christians punks. I've seen Satanists/Goths sporting giant crosses or upside-down crosses. It is nothing but an aberration.

It is all in the use of the symbol. The cross is a symbol of suffering, of what Jesus went through. However, it has now become a fashion accessory. Personally, even though I have deep faith, I would never wear a cross on any part of my person.

Sadly I know far too many christians that can't see their own gardens either.

Quite so. I have a thing against organised religion.

[Sephodwyrm]

Why are you bullying so much on the cross? It’s a symbol which is deep rooted in European culture and history. And good folks as well as the bad guys used it. KKK (btw, it was always a tiny organization) used the cross, but hospitals and charities too. Indeed, horrible things were done under the sign of cross, but equally horrible things were done under crescent or shahada which are prominent symbols of Muslim countries or any other religious symbol (not even mentioning the ancient Indoeuropean swastika). But the fact that a bunch of sickos use this sign, it does not mean that it is cursed.

As usual, the Christian defensive is to drag in the Muslims, who in the issue of body counts, did less.
If you feel polemic about me bringing up the cross, think of how polemic the Chinese feel when you bring up the dragon.
If the Chinese serpent was used as an icon of religious intolerance, racism and self-infused superiority, I might have an issue.
And KKK was not "ALWAYS" a small organization. You should rehash your historical knowledge first.

The cross is a symbol of suffering, of what Jesus went through.

The cross was a means of executing rebels, en masse, usually, in the Roman era.

The reason why I am dragging the cross in is because some people are attacking the Dragon. So if its ok to attack the dragon, why should it be taboo to attack the cross? If you wish to discuss more about the cross, you are free to do so in another thread. But I think things would not go to well. I consider myself a follower of Christ as well, just to remind you.

Edited by Sephodwyrm, 22 March 2007 - 02:03 PM.

[yarovit]

As usual, the Christian defensive is to drag in the Muslims, who in the issue of body counts, did less.
If you feel polemic about me bringing up the cross, think of how polemic the Chinese feel when you bring up the dragon.
If the Chinese serpent was used as an icon of religious intolerance, racism and self-infused superiority, I might have an issue.
And KKK was not "ALWAYS" a small organization. You should rehash your historical knowledge first.
The cross was a means of executing rebels, en masse, usually, in the Roman era.

I wrote about Islamic symbols as well as about swastika (also a religious symbol) to show that also symbols of other religions were used as banner to ugly things. In order to dispel suggestions that only Christians did nasty things under their cross. I have read some of your posts. Quite often you refer to Christianity, and always you have something against it. It this thread you also came up with this stuff. So, please do not apply your own logic and behavior to me.

KKK was a massive organization when at the very beginning, when it was a society of the Civil War Confederate veterans and their families. It turned into what it is known best a bit later, when it was much smaller.

Muslims, who in the issue of body counts, did less.

Yeah, whatever.

I consider myself a follower of Christ as well, just to remind you.

Honestly, I do not care. To me you may follow Jesus, Muhammad, Buddha, L. Hubbard, Rael, worship Sun or bow to an elephant. More, to me you may worship a pack of M&Ms if it gives you inner peace and feeds your need of a superior force. I only want you and all others believers of all religions to respect a completely freedom of belief and disbelief. So, you are free to worship your M&Ms as long as you do not force me do to it with you, allow me to express my opinion about your belief, and you let others to abandon your belief if they wish to do so.

No, I am not Christian. I am not a believer, I am a disbeliever.

Edited by yarovit, 22 March 2007 - 03:37 PM.