Meerkat Musings

There's a Meerkat in all of us

Politics and SocietyRandom Prompts

Meerkat Prompts: The Principle of Certainty

Welcome to a prompt inspired by a rather unwelcome sight from a month ago. For some context, check out this Meerkat Muse, and specifically where I reference the swastika.

Cultural and religious symbols can be co-opted over time, with their meanings changed. The swastika is a key example, with a lot of ancient history behind it, but much of that is obscured behind the modern meaning, which is what most people, especially people living in the western world, know. The Nazis corrupted the swastika, to the degree that there is an automatic association with the Nazis, and what they stood for.

Is this fair? Perhaps not, but it is nonetheless a fact. The actions and evil of the Nazis has led to the swastika being associated with the far right, and in the decades since the defeat of the Nazis, far-right groups have sought to use the swastika to ‘advertise’ their ideas and ideals. It seems likely that a swastika appearing as a painted or drawn sign on a wall or pavement, is there because someone is pushing a neo-Nazi agenda, or flaunting their far-right beliefs, especially in parts of the world where the Nazis were active, or where their propaganda took root.

Can this be said as an absolute? No, of course not. There is however, such a thing as a reasonable conclusion based on available facts. It is possible whoever drew the swastika on the pavement in my town did so without intending any Nazi connotations of any kind, however, there is possible, and there there is probable. Considering the relatively recent history that is World War II, and the Nazis, and considering the activities of neo-Nazi groups all over the world (some of which have continued to use the swastika as their emblem), is it unreasonable to conclude the swastika painted not far from my home was intended as a symbol of far-right expression?

If we go looking for absolutes in all things, we will often be found wanting. We will be afraid to ever draw any conclusions of any kind. Of course conclusions drawn from historical analysis, archaeology etc, should always be taken with a pinch of salt, but that doesn’t mean that instead, we tie ourselves up in knots, second-guessing ourselves into indecision. If everyone did that, all the time, no one would ever make any progress with anything. It is arguably a very stupid approach to life.

I cannot put my hand on my heart and say the swastika I saw was absolutely to do with wannabe far-right fascists, but given what most people learn about the Nazis and their symbols, (especially in my part of the world) and given that my local area has recently devoted a lot of votes to hard-right political parties, it is not an unreasonable conclusion.

Let’s try and put this another way. Let’s say there’s an artefact or object, and 10 possible explanations for what it is. Smart people will examine where it was found, what it was found with, how old it is, who (if anyone) it was found with, and also look at any other evidence relating to this object, based on any previous finds and discoveries. After doing all of that, there might be a 70% chance that option 1 is the best explanation, a 15% chance for option 2, and a steadily shrinking percentage for the remaining possibilities. Now, it is impossible to say with absolute certainty that option 1 is the best explanation, but do we grant the other possibilities equal weight, even though they’re not actually equal? Does that make sense?

Humanity would still live in caves if we allowed small uncertainties to prevent us from ever drawing conclusions. No one would learn anything, and we’d all sit around, riddled with indecision. Like I said, that’s a stupid philosophy.

Back to Meerkat Prompts

Please follow and like us:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *