489 réponses à ce sujet

[Johnnie Walker]

Yet when you see a Swastika, you think of Nasis and white supremacists, not German soldiers defending their homeland.

 

When I see a Swastika, I not only think of that but I also think about the origin of the Swastika which is still used in India and Indonesia for worshiping Hinduism, Buddhism and other religions. According to studies, it has been around for about 12,000 years.

 

 

I agree with you, Isichar on the steps to eradicate racism, but the media never has all the stories. Back when Obama won his first election, I was taking a walk with a friend, and a group of African Americans strode up to us and started shouting "OBAMA!" "What are you racists!?" "Yeah this is beat whitey night!" Luckily I was just arriving at my house where I let my 100lb dog out and they ran off. Everyone gets discriminated. It's not just blacks (no offense to anyone) that are being unfairly treated. But you're right, there is a lot of discrimination towards blacks and not all cops are made out of gold either.

 

Also, what if all this flag debating leads to a bigger uproar thus creating more chaos and doing the exact opposite of what they're trying to accomplish? Because you really do have a lot of people out there making assumptions towards even history buffs that might like collecting flags. And if push comes to shove, those people could lash back out. But if that does happen, it will eventually die down but into what?

 

I'm not trying to stir anything up btw, just genuinely curious about people's perception. I just like covering every point of view, weather I believe in it or not. I do believe that in order to fully understanding something, you have to look at it from every side and angle, instead of just one or two, ya know?

[Isichar]

Racist? Or trigger happy?

 

Can't it be both?

[Cainhurst Crow]

Godwin'd that for you.

Yet when you see a Swastika, you think of Nasis and white supremacists, not German soldiers defending their homeland.

 

Guess we need to ban The Pianist, Downfall, and Valkyrie then, can't have any Nasis be portrayed as anything but baby burners, no matter how low on the chain they were. Also all those pesky WWII memorials east of the Atlantic that might have the swastika on it, just for good measure. Only way to stop the hate and get rid of that oppressive symbol is to ban it from ever being seen anywhere by anyone for any reason.

[Cainhurst Crow]

Instead of arguing each case specifically I think it's better to look at the larger picture. To be fair I don't think you're entirely wrong. Yes a lot of these things do get lumped together and sure some of them probably can be justified more then others, but there's still a really bad trend going on of questionable incidents that needs to be addressed and taken seriously.

 

I'm just wondering where all the outrage was when there were all those drive by shootings and funeral assassinations taking place over the past couple years. It seems only now do people care about random acts of violence with murky justification.

 

Guess there is racism afoot if people only get up in arms if a white person commits a crime. Even in condemnation, they get preferential treatment.

[Obadiah]

I don't think the Confederate flag is the real issue. The real issue is people can't accept that their forefathers were wrong to fight for slavery. If the message of the folks in favor of the flag was, "This is our heritage, some of which we're not proud of," like pretty much every other symbol of heritage out there, then I don't think there would be this much of a backlash against the flag.

[The Devlish Redhead]

Guess we need to ban The Pianist, Downfall, and Valkyrie then, can't have any Nasis be portrayed as anything but baby burners, no matter how low on the chain they were. Also all those pesky WWII memorials east of the Atlantic that might have the swastika on it, just for good measure. Only way to stop the hate and get rid of that oppressive symbol is to ban it from ever being seen anywhere by anyone for any reason.

 

The thing is if you keep taking down symbols that offend people NOW aren't you as guilty of rewriting history as the people who are apologists for those symbols?  I say let them stay. They are part of history and there's nothing you can do about it unless you want to change the history books too..

[o Ventus]

 

One reason why I love Stephen Fry.

[o Ventus]

I'm fairly sure this has been posted already (but lol @ digging through 20 pages to find it), but:

 

 

Yeah, Walmart declined to bake a cake with the Confederate flag iced onto it, so they turned around and made a cake adorned with an ISIS flag.

 

In other news, while this ridiculous ban on the Confederate flag is still in effect, Mein Kampf is available in paperback at Walmart, Target, and Amazon. I would hope Amazon knows better than to ban something based on history from many decades ago, but I think it's lol that Walmart and Target both carry it as well.

[Fast Jimmy]

Guess we need to ban The Pianist, Downfall, and Valkyrie then, can't have any Nasis be portrayed as anything but baby burners, no matter how low on the chain they were. Also all those pesky WWII memorials east of the Atlantic that might have the swastika on it, just for good measure. Only way to stop the hate and get rid of that oppressive symbol is to ban it from ever being seen anywhere by anyone for any reason.

We don't need to BAN anything. That's not what I'm advocating (as can be seen multiple times in my comments calling Apple's action, while legal and within their ability to perform, morally wrong).

Weed isn't legal in most of the country. Yet I wouldn't say someone couldn't have a bumperstick with a mary jane leaf on it that said "Legalize It!" because such a thing would be banning and that would be wrong. People should be free to express themselves however the heck they want.

BUT... it would be highly inappropriate for a state to wave a flag of the founding fathers smoking a fat doobie on the front steps of that state's capitol. One is banning any content to exist at all... the other is removing the state's government (which must represent ALL people of its state equally) from the role of promoting inappropriate content.



The Confederate Flag is a symbol of racism. Full stop. Its origins are rooted in racism (the designer himself said it was designed to be a worldwide symbol of the supremacy of the white race), its history is rooted in racism (it was used as a battle banner in a conflict to preserve slavery and where states blatantly said slavery and the superiority of the white race was their prime reason for fighting said war in multiple declarations of independence) and it is used even today in racist propaganda (as can be seen by groups like the KKK continuing to use it, as well as other radicals who promote and commit racial violence).

In that light, it is not appropriate content. The state capitol should not be flying inappropriate content in front of the very buildings designed to provide equal support, assistance and stability to all of its citizens.

[Fast Jimmy]

Nevermind, I take it all back...

 

 

...having a state flag where the founding fathers were smoking a doobie would be AWESOME.

[Inquisitor Recon]

The Confederate Flag is racist. Full stop. Its origins are racist (the designer himself said it was designed to be a worldwide symbol of the supremacy of the white race), its history is racist (it was used a battle banner in a conflict to preserve slavery and where states blatantly said slavery and the superiority of the white race was their prime reason for fighting said war in multiple declarations of independence) and it is used even today in racist propaganda (as can be seen by groups like the KKK continuing to use it, as well as other radicals who promote and commit racial violence). 

 

In that light, it is not appropriate content. The state capitol should not be flying inappropriate content in front of the very buildings designed to provide equal support, assistance and stability to all of its citizens. 

A piece of cloth cannot be racist. If you want argue that it symbolizes racism, but a piece of cloth has no feelings on race whatsoever.

[Fast Jimmy]

A piece of cloth cannot be racist. If you want argue that it symbolizes racism, but a piece of cloth has no feelings on race whatsoever.

<sigh>

Fine - I will edit it to say "symbol of racism."

[Johnnie Walker]

Turning my state's flag into founding fathers lighting it up? I'm fo dat.

[Voxr]

Who cares about the Founding Fathers getting lit, what about us? 

 

 

 

In Mary We Trust tbh.

[AventuroLegendary]

Turning my state's flag into founding fathers lighting it up? I'm fo dat.

 

[Zanallen]

Please, the battle flag was raised in the 60s as opposition to the Civil Rights movement. Before that, it played little role in "Southern Heritage". It is also used by the KKK as a symbol of racism against black people. The Civil War was about slavery and white supremacy. That flag and all the Confederate flags represent bigotry and have no purpose raised above a government building. Keep them in your homes, sell them in stores, I don't care.

[Cainhurst Crow]

We don't need to BAN anything. That's not what I'm advocating (as can be seen multiple times in my comments calling Apple's action, while legal and within their ability to perform, morally wrong).

Weed isn't legal in most of the country. Yet I wouldn't say someone couldn't have a bumperstick with a mary jane leaf on it that said "Legalize It!" because such a thing would be banning and that would be wrong. People should be free to express themselves however the heck they want.

BUT... it would be highly inappropriate for a state to wave a flag of the founding fathers smoking a fat doobie on the front steps of that state's capitol. One is banning any content to exist at all... the other is removing the state's government (which must represent ALL people of its state equally) from the role of promoting inappropriate content.



The Confederate Flag is a symbol of racism. Full stop. Its origins are rooted in racism (the designer himself said it was designed to be a worldwide symbol of the supremacy of the white race), its history is rooted in racism (it was used a battle banner in a conflict to preserve slavery and where states blatantly said slavery and the superiority of the white race was their prime reason for fighting said war in multiple declarations of independence) and it is used even today in racist propaganda (as can be seen by groups like the KKK continuing to use it, as well as other radicals who promote and commit racial violence).

In that light, it is not appropriate content. The state capitol should not be flying inappropriate content in front of the very buildings designed to provide equal support, assistance and stability to all of its citizens.

 

We aren't talking about the state capitols however, they've long since stopped being relevant, as they have to those demanding the flag be removed. The focus has been pressuring all private and public institutions to remove the flag from all walks of life. Be it in historical popular culture ((Dukes of Hazard Car)), historical monuments ((Jefferson memorial and the various confederate statues, some of them serving as graves)), and from use in hisotircal-based media ((the apple game)).

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

Godwin'd that for you.

Yet when you see a Swastika, you think of Nasis and white supremacists, not German soldiers defending their homeland.

 

No. I'm reminded of this Natzi temple:

 

 

Doubt any logic will fix the situation. People are far too emotional about such things, some symbols cause different feelings in others. Hell if I had ancestors who were part of the Finnish Air Force in the times past and I'd have their stuff in my apartment, I'd probably be labeled as a nazi and get into trouble for it. Maybe not in Finland but elsewhere.

I think Apple's move is rather extreme, especially since things didn't seem to bother that much prior to recent events. If anything it only proves how fucked up societies nowadays are, people are always afraid of offending someone or some group. The energy and time spent on wondering who might the next action or statement offend could surely be spent on something actually productive.

 

^

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

Now I'm confused on how you define liberalism.

 

Liberalism is a historically new term alongside socialism and I mean mostly on social matters not economic ones.

During history most people were either conservative (following traditions) or pragmatic (following what's best in practice). Liberals were a tiny minority.

Liberalism is something created by people behind French Revolution. But it mostly got forgotten (thanks to Robespierre and Napoleon) until 20th century and specially with United Nations revival of it. Its other name is Human-Rightism that means they consider the Human Rights book created by United Nation as their bible or holly book. So... either you're 100% submitted to this book or you're a bigot that should be condemned and avoided.

 

Not all liberals are that extreme, but they're expected to be like that.

[Dermain]

You don't. You use the same frameworks of logic and reason that everyone else does and you're probably not a sociopath either. You just come to really dumb conclusions.

 

He's still a teenager. That's what teenagers do.

 

Perhaps I put it... incorrectly. 1: My opinions differ from other people's some of the time. That... I will not deny. 

 

2: I am anti social, that is true. 

 

As for conclusions... 3: mine differ from others from time to time, thus you see them as "dumb" like in this case because I'm not agreeing with most of this thread. But what if I was? Then you wouldn't be saying I was coming to a "dumb" conclusion on this round. 

 

1: No, they do not think differently than you. You're not "special". You're just a teenager that has the usual "I'm different than everyone else" mindset. You'll grow out of it.

 

2: There are two forms of the term antisocial in psychology. The first meaning avoiding interaction with other people, and the second would be being a sociopath/psychopath (or the more correct form antisocial personality disorder). A person with ASPD (usually the acronym is ASD) does not necessarily avoid people since that would limit their negative interactions with other people (which they usually take some joy from). They have absolutely no empathy, or (as later research showed) if they do have empathy they just don't care. You're too young to be diagnosed with ASPD, and you're confusing the two versions of the term "antisocial" the exact same way the rest of the public does.

 

3: That's not why he's calling you dumb.

[Fast Jimmy]

We aren't talking about the state capitols however, they've long since stopped being relevant, as they have to those demanding the flag be removed. The focus has been pressuring all private and public institutions to remove the flag from all walks of life.

So you agree that South Carolina was right to take down the flag at its Capitol? And that states like Georgia and Mississippi should do the same?

Be it in historical popular culture ((Dukes of Hazard Car)), historical monuments ((Jefferson memorial and the various confederate statues, some of them serving as graves)), and from use in hisotircal-based media ((the apple game)).

I agree... especially on the monument part. Honoring an American soldier that lost his life in war is not something that should be snubbed, even if the war itself had unsavory moral aspects. Blame the politicians, not the young men who died in the line of duty. Anyone who says such monuments should be taken down (or even that the US flag itself should be removed) is a nut job with an axe to grind and isn't being taken seriously (the petition to have the Confederate Soldier monument removed barely had over a couple hundred signatures last I checked - compared to the nearly half a million to take down the Confederage Battle Flag in front of the SC capitol - and no one has listened to any word Louis Farrahkan has said in decades).

But in terms of retailers removing goods... that is their prerogative. I don't agree with some it, but it is their choice and ability to do so, just like it is their choice to not sell alcohol or tobacco in some major retailers. As long as the government (state or federal) is not putting an official ban on owning or selling this symbol, businesses can do whatever they want in search of profits or moral standing (I'll give you a guess at which one they really care about).

[Cainhurst Crow]

It's peoples choice and ability to fly the confederate flag as well. That didn't stop you and others criticizing them about it. What's the difference between criticizing a perosn and criticizing a corporate entity? One has millions in revenue and will never be affected the insult. The other is a single person who gets the full brunt of anger.

 

To me the priorities completely backwards. The people are dehumanized to make generalizations and insults easier to do, relegated to being "dumbfucks" as a substitute for being "people who I dont agree with/who I think are wrong". Meanwhile, at the same time we're humanizing corporations by referring to them in personalized manners such as "they" and refering to them on a first name basis with an emphasis on rights. "This person walmart id having their rights violated by a pack of dumbfucks. We must protect them!"

 

This whole thing feels like a goddamn madhouse.

[Dermain]

It's peoples choice and ability to fly the confederate flag as well. That didn't stop you and others criticizing them about it. What's the difference between criticizing a perosn and criticizing a corporate entity? One has millions in revenue and will never be affected the insult. The other is a single person who gets the full brunt of anger.

 

To me the priorities completely backwards. The people are dehumanized to make generalizations and insults easier to do, relegated to being "dumbfucks" as a substitute for being "people who I dont agree with/who I think are wrong". Meanwhile, at the same time we're humanizing corporations by referring to them in personalized manners such as "they" and refering to them on a first name basis with an emphasis on rights. "This person walmart id having their rights violated by a pack of dumbfucks. We must protect them!"

 

This whole thing feels like a goddamn madhouse.

 

That's part of the human condition, and it will never change.

[Fast Jimmy]

It's peoples choice and ability to fly the confederate flag as well. That didn't stop you and others criticizing them about it. What's the difference between criticizing a perosn and criticizing a corporate entity? One has millions in revenue and will never be affected the insult. The other is a single person who gets the full brunt of anger.

To me the priorities completely backwards. The people are dehumanized to make generalizations and insults easier to do, relegated to being "dumbfucks" as a substitute for being "people who I dont agree with/who I think are wrong". Meanwhile, at the same time we're humanizing corporations by referring to them in personalized manners such as "they" and refering to them on a first name basis with an emphasis on rights. "This person walmart id having their rights violated by a pack of dumbfucks. We must protect them!"

This whole thing feels like a goddamn madhouse.

You are free to fly the flag all you want. It is your freedom of speech to do so. And nothing should take that away from you.

And people are free to call you any sort of name imaginable for it all THEY want. It is their freedom of speech to do so. And nothing should take that away from them.

Your freedom does not make you immune to criticism and harsh feedback. To think otherwise means you have been hanging out too much with the SJWs.

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

This whole thing feels like a goddamn madhouse.

 

Hey, it's one of the rare opportunities on BSN to be serious. Rejoice!