Broken Cross
also called a Neronic Cross or a Stipe
The Broken Cross could be seen as simply an upright stipe supported by two lower beams. Whilst most people envisage the cross used to crucify Jesus was the Latin Cross or Tau Cross, some (for example, Jehovah's Witnesses) believe Jesus was actually crucified on just an upright wooden post; Crux Simplex.
Whatever the design of the cruciform, it was quite possibly a stipe that Jesus was fastened to for scourging before his Crucifixion. The stick used to beat Jesus is featured on the Arms of Christ page. That armament of Christ was for man's salvation – very different to the armament mentioned above, built for man's destruction.
The Broken Cross has Pagan roots, being the inverse of the Pythagorean symbol for life and Teutonic rune of death, and is vogue with Wiccans and Satanists. It can represent the antithesis of all that Christianity stands for.
Some see breaking a cross as a way to protest against Christianity. An example of this has been witnessed in recent years in Armenia (see Khachkar Cross).
The Broken Cross has been called a Neronic Cross or Nero's Cross in recognition of Nero's attempt to suppress the rise of Christianity (see St. Peter's Cross). It seems illogical to connect a symbol of Christianity to people opposed to the religion, albeit inverted and broken, but labelling this as Nero's Cross has found its way into reference books and no doubt will continue to mean different things to different people.
CND
Radioactivity hazard
N
D
Semaphore positions
Enclosed in a circle, the Broken Cross has been the emblem of the UK's Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament since 1958 and the symbol has become synonymous with 'Peace'.
The designer of the CND logo, Gerald Holtom, chose something that would be easily recognisable, like the radioactivity hazard symbol, and circular, so it would be suitable for a badge. It wasn't his intention to use a Broken Cross per se, but simply incorporated the semaphore positions of 'N' and 'D', an acronym for Nuclear Disarmament. (For other peace symbols, see Pax Cross and Dove Cross).
CND feel the best way to change the world's nuclear threat is for governments to set an example by unilaterally disarming their nuclear arsenal, believing that a multinational approach is unrealistic. In the 1980s the UK Government, and particularly the Tories, preferred the public to embrace a multinational approach and attempted to discredit CND and similar peace organisations by supporting organisations such as Youth for Multilateral Disarmament and the Coalition for Peace through Security. They attacked the CND as a front for supporting Communism, prosaically referring to C, N, D as Communists, Neutralists, and Defeatists.
Even today, some dismiss the CND as somewhat anti-establishment, but it's well worth reading what the CND has to say before passing judgement on whether the Establishment, elected or not, is right.
One of the reasons why Putin violated the Russia-sanctioned Budapest Memorandum and invaded Ukraine, was because he believed that NATO was a threat to his desire to enlarge his empire, which would be difficult if Ukraine joined NATO. So here's a question: In the 1990s when becoming an independent state, if Ukraine had retained the Soviet nuclear weapons in its territory, would that have prevented Putin from invading? Would he have followed the concept of Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD), the military doctrine where opposing sides possess enough nuclear weaponry to completely destroy each other in the event of a nuclear war? Or does that rely too heavily on rational decisions being made by Putin?
Or Trump?
