Question about not officially recognized organisations etc

[Zdzislaw Rudzki]

In today's world there exist plenty of not officially recognized organisations, independence movements etc. Some of them have their uniforms and insignia. The question arises if their insignia should be presented at all and if yes - where? This is sometimes a very delicate matter. So the editors would like to know readers opinion about this subject. Therefore a little question:

[Erwin]

I personally think that previous unofficial organisations would be no problem, since they were part of history.

It seems to me like there might be some problem with other members with current unofficial organisations.

However from what I've observed, our members have genuine interest in rank insignia, sometimes there were some political discussions, but at the end of the day we know that this is a website on rank insignia. Therefore we always leave it as that, a forum for ranks not politics.

[Chuck Anderson]

Hi Zdzislaw!
Chuck Anderson here!!

There should be room for BOTH Officially-recognized and Unofficially-recognized organisations to have their insignia of rank displayed in this website!

We have a rather large Fictional section for all sorts of FANTASY/SCI-FI organisations (Starfleet,etc.), and there seems to be little worry of including their rank insignia!

Why then, would we be any less inclusive of REAL organisations having their rank insignia here! We may not agree with their politics and/or philosophy, but including their rank insignia does not make us supporters or fellow travelers. The website has illustrations of insignia of the 3rd Reich, but that doesn't make people who post such information as Nazis!

My point is that an obscure,unofficially-recognized group that is REAL, with REAL PEOPLE and REAL MEMBERS has just as much right to be posted to this website as do all the FANTASY/SCI-FI nations,etc.

Chuck Anderson
usafwo1_1975@military.com

[Robb Mavins]

Sorry for my late reply - the last two weeks have been "busy"
My vote and thought would be “Under their not officially recognized country names (like "Chechnia" section)” as opposed to Under the name of the country they're existing in (and sometimes fighting against). However, having that name *(asterisked) or in a separate section called “provisional” or unofficial would be be fine as well.

My train of thought would be as follows:
These are in a lot of cases in which both sides share the same name, if not then certianly the country of "contention" would be best to be listed. I agree they Should all defiantly be listed (with an explanation perhaps?). If listed they should be listed under “their” name as opposed to their opponent’s. This is one small thing we could do to prevent revisionist history.

While I personally like this, I realize that there are many possible problems such as the Fenians – Irish patriots who invaded Canada from US soil while fighting Britain.

Or here is an odd one The Confederate States of America - the original (1861) and the current
(1990) revival with an actual military and political structure. I would have put the later squarely in “fictive” or “micronations” until I spoke with a USN Commander who is now a Captain in the provisional CSN.

[kenneth]

Hi all,
It is my humble opinion that all ranks and rank structures should be refected herein. However that said it is imperitive that when these "unofficial" structures or ranks are depicted they should have a caption that stipulates that they are indeed unofficial. Erwin stats

since they were part of history

This is correct as they are or have been part of History they should be illustrated.

[Jacob Lessing]

This forum is informative and nature and ipso facto (should be) very objective. I therefore see no problem with representing the insignia of all possible organizations, whether recognized or not. I do believe that there should be some sort of indicator for this, but only for purely informative reasons.