Many flags around the world are iconic, think the ones of France, Canada, South Africa, the Nordics, etc.

However, there are some that aren’t as good, like the Australian and New Zealand flags, both of which still retain the union jack with little Indigenous symbolism. Speaking as an Australian myself, our flag isn’t all that great! The Southern Cross is cool, but there is no hint of green/gold, and the union jack just looks tacked on. There are also many flags that look good, but the symbolism represents ideas that you’re against. Think Iran’s flag that draws heavily from their sect of Islam and the theocracy, or the PRC’s flag having the smaller stars representing the people surrounding the larger star representing the one party state. There’s also some that are okay, but a bit boring and hard of distinguish from the rest, and an additional element would make it stand out more.

And purple should be on more flags! Republican Spain during the 1930s had some purple, but they lost the civil war and the flag was replaced.

If you could change the national flags of the world, what would be your flag proposals?

  • OwOarchist@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    20 days ago

    Idealism, I know

    Not just idealism, pure fantasy:

    imagine an infinite landscape where nations are far apart.

    That does not describe the real world in any way. Not even an ‘ideal’ world. It’s not even physically possible. (And people accuse us anarchists of living in idealist fantasy land!)

    In the real world, land is not infinite. Anytime one group (whether you call it a nation or a community or whatever) tries to lay claim to a portion of the land to the exclusion of all others, that’s an act of violence – because it’s ultimately only enforceable through violence. Our finite earth belongs to us all. They did not create it, and they have no right (except ‘might makes right’ violence) to take portions of it away from you.

    (Now, there’s something to be said about personal use here, though. If a farmer has worked and improved some land and is currently using it to produce food, in a way, they did create it. Didn’t create the land itself, of course, but they created the farm, and they have legitimate claim to that farm … and by necessity, the land the farm sits on. If someone builds a house and is living in that house, they can have a claim to the house because they created it … and by necessity, the land that the house sits on. But nobody should be able to claim land that they’re not personally using and exclude others from it.)