[schroeding]

Yes it is, the swastikas of buddhist temples are Hakenkreuze - they just have a different meaning. The Japanese call them Manji - is it also a different symbol? No, it's just a different name.

Take a look at this book from the 19th century, about the religious symbol, notice the name: https://books.google.de/books?id=VbkNkkgHvYgC&pg=PA1&printse...

The orientation does not matter, take a look at the Zeppelintribüne of the Nürnberger Reichsparteitagsgelände - it had a gigantic Hakenkreuz on top, in a non-angled configuration.

[Mo3]

It may very well be the same geometric structure. It is a COMPLETELY different symbol (as in, speaking about symbolic meaning)

The man himself in his book Mein Kampf wrote,

> "I myself, meanwhile, after innumerable attempts, had laid down a final form; a flag with a red background, a white disk, and a black hooked cross in the middle. After long trials I also found a definite proportion between the size of the flag and the size of the white disk, as well as the shape and thickness of the hooked cross."

> "As National Socialists, we see our program in our flag. In red, we see the social idea of the movement; in white, the nationalistic idea; in the hooked cross, the mission of the struggle for the victory of the Aryan man, and, by the same token, the victory of the idea of creative work."

Correct me if I'm wrong, but assigning new symbolic meaning to a symbol results in a new, unrelated symbol.

[schroeding]

You wrote

> Hakenkreuz is not “literally the name for a swastika”. Hakenkreuz literally translates to hooked cross.

But it literally is the translation for swastika. There are books from the 19th century talking about the Hakenkreuze in buddhist temples. And yeah, you can translate it to hooked cross. But English is not the authoritative language on this topic, German is, as the Nazis did not speak english (as their native language).

(Original Nazi sources ahead)

Take a look at this edition of "Volk and Rasse": https://www.google.de/books/edition/Volk_und_Rasse/n9sZAAAAM... On Page 465, there is a description of a "racial school" in Berlin with the name "Swastika". Because it's the same symbol. This Book was published by the Rassehauptamt of the NSDAP, directly by the Nazis.

The Hakenkreuz as a religious swastika is also being mentioned in this book: https://www.google.de/books/edition/Der_S_A_F%C3%BChrer/wdU7... Published for the SA, also directly by the Nazis. They directly reference it as "also a swastika, like our swastika".

[Mo3]

> But it literally is the translation for swastika.

No, it is not. Even Hakenkreuz, in German, does not translate to Swastika.

Hakenkreuz is, as typical for German, made up of two distinct words - Haken, hook, and Kreuz, cross.

It is very likely that "Hakenkreuz" had simply at some point developed upon seeing a Swastika and trying to visually describe it in German, which would make it a pointer/reference. A lot of German words have exactly this mechanism of origin.

Now, I'm not trying to argue with you that a Hakenkreuz simply used to be a reference/pointer to a Swastika, BUT it was only until the original reference was appropriated and perverted by the Nazi regime, making the resulting output most definitely a new and distinct symbol with a new, distinct symbolic meaning.

[schroeding]

I fail to see where you disagree with me, on the ethmological part. Yeah, Hakenkreuz describes the swastika, a "Kreuz" mit "Haken" on the ends, but then... it still is just the German word for swastika, no? Like "Hakaristi" is in suomi / finnish. "Eisenbahn" still is just the word for railroad and not for "iron track", even though it's technically correct :D

"This tempel has a big, golden swastika" could be translated as: "Dieser Tempel hat ein großes goldenes Hakenkreuz" or "Dieser Tempel hat eine große goldene Swastika", neither of them is wrong, even today.