(October 26, 2017 at 2:46 pm)wallym Wrote:

(October 26, 2017 at 12:24 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: ...and plenty wouldn't.

I certainly can't help it if anyone sees refusing to participate in coerced nationalistic virtue signaling to be offensive.  Quite frankly, I see no reason to kowtow to their demands.

I think the coerced nationalistic virtue signalling could also be viewed as a harmless agreed upon social norm to politely show respect.

I meet someone and they put out their hand, I know the act of holding hands and wiggling them a couple times is fucking dumb.  But that's what we came up with.  Is it so dumb that I'm going to start slapping people's hands away and calling them morons?  I don't really see a need for that.  We shake hands, and move on.

Nationalism and militarism certainly are scary'ish ideas.  On the flip side, a sense of community, and an appreciation for some who've sacrificed is another way to frame it.  I think as individuals, we can easily scale the intensity of what it means to us.  Some people just have difficulty not projecting that intensity onto others.  But that's how symbolism works.  I like the confederate flag because I grew up watching the Dukes of Hazzard.  I had a general lee car, and bedspread.  That's my relationship to that flag.  For me, I 'kowtow' to others demands, because they seem reasonable enough.   To me it's just a cool design, to them it's a history of persecution, so I go along with the idea of not displaying it all over or whatever.  The American flag goes the same way.  I don't give a shit about the military.  But I know a lot of people do, and I think that's reasonable enough.  So I play along, as it doesn't cost me anything.  I guess I could draw a line in the sand, but I just don't see what I'd be trying to gain by doing so.

That being said, I see someone like Colin Kaep doing what he's doing to protest treatment of black people in America, that seems 100% justified.  And I think in a better world, what he's doing and those who find a lot of meaning related to military would have no problem coexisting.

No, the same political shaming was used in the 50s and 60s against minorities. The same political vilification and demands of loyalty were that of WW2 Germany. 

Colin is right, the right is wrong. Progress was never made in this country by social conservatives. Progress in the west has always been lead by liberals. And I don't want to hear crap about Lincoln being a Republican either, the parties flipped with Nixon's "southern strategy". 

Of course what Colin is doing is justified. What 45 is doing is not.

(October 26, 2017 at 2:46 pm)wallym Wrote:

(October 26, 2017 at 12:24 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: ...and plenty wouldn't.

I certainly can't help it if anyone sees refusing to participate in coerced nationalistic virtue signaling to be offensive.  Quite frankly, I see no reason to kowtow to their demands.

I think the coerced nationalistic virtue signalling could also be viewed as a harmless agreed upon social norm to politely show respect.

Given the history of the pledge and it's use in schools, I find this to be an incredibly disingenuous interpretation.

(October 26, 2017 at 3:02 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote: I served. For what it's worth, I really don't want people standing for the pledge if they don't want to, no matter what the reason. It loses all meaning if you stand for any other reason than to express your patriotism. Standing to meet people's expectations isn't exactly noble.

This. Whether compelled or coerced via social convention, the oath is rendered effectively meaningless as anything other than a tool to promote so-called "patriotism".

I already swore a meaningful oath to that effect, I certainly don't need to recite a wholly meaningless one, and I won't expect anyone else to either.

(October 26, 2017 at 3:27 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote:

(October 26, 2017 at 3:02 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote: I served. For what it's worth, I really don't want people standing for the pledge if they don't want to, no matter what the reason. It loses all meaning if you stand for any other reason than to express your patriotism. Standing to meet people's expectations isn't exactly noble.

This.   Whether compelled or coerced via social convention, the oath is rendered effectively meaningless as anything other than a tool to promote so-called "patriotism".

I already swore a meaningful oath to that effect, I certainly don't need to recite a wholly meaningless one, and I won't expect anyone else to either.

Any agreement entered into has to be voluntary, ritual does not constitute law, and is always highly subject to point of view in any case. Peer pressure is childish, the tactic of a bully or despot. The acts of consenting adults are as they should be voluntary, not out of shame, or coercion.

And since ritual is highly subjective to the individual, to force such on any individual is not defense pluralism, or protection of, but counter to such.

Common law is the only thing we all have. Whether we have served or not, our duty is to common law, not common view of "what should be" or "what we want to be". The First Amendment and the Oath of Office are the law, not ritual. Pluralism is not forced ritual, pluralism is based on consent and common law.

---

(October 26, 2017 at 2:55 pm)wallym Wrote:

(October 26, 2017 at 2:49 pm)Lutrinae Wrote: You could just not shake the person's hand.  Some people are germophobes and some people are simply uncomfortable with physical contact.

If I don't want to shake your hand, I'm just not going to do it.

Yeah, if you have a reason, not shaking hands is perfectly reasonable.  If you just refuse to adopt social norms because "you're not the boss of me!", that's fine too.  But you'll have to deal with the somewhat deserved repercussions as well.

So glad Susan B Anthony obeyed the sexist majority of her time. Damned glad Rosa Parks sat at the back of the bus too. 

We are the boss of OUR government, not the other way around. 45 has ran his campaign based on despot talk, not talk of consent, but "I know what is best for everyone".

To the bigoted assholes on the right, I say, "Bring it on assholes".

(October 26, 2017 at 10:59 am)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(October 26, 2017 at 8:09 am)Tazzycorn Wrote: It's an unconstitutional piece of rabble rousing rhetoric more suited to somewhere like Nazi Germany.

Lol you are so obsessed with Nazis and calling everyone a Nazi.

Never called you a nazi. I know you're Opus Dei.

---

(October 26, 2017 at 12:12 pm)Tiberius Wrote: It's weird when it comes to kids because they probably don't understand the words they are saying. Even if you don't force kids to say it (which legally, schools cannot), kids succumb to peer pressure more than anyone, and if most other kids are doing it, they will probably feel left out and do it too, so even when it's not forced it still kinda is.

There's no reason for kids to pledge allegiance to their country in the first place, we don't ask kids to defend it, they can't vote or make any kind of social / economic changes. The only reason they get kids to say it is probably to instill some form of nationalism at an early age.

The reason for the pledge is the same reason the rcc refuses flat out to give up control of Irish primary schools (elementaries for ye Yanks), get them before they can understand the bullshit, and you've got a much better chance they'll stay stupid enough to continue believing the bullshit.

(October 26, 2017 at 5:29 pm)Tazzycorn Wrote:

(October 26, 2017 at 10:59 am)Catholic_Lady Wrote: Lol you are so obsessed with Nazis and calling everyone a Nazi.

Never called you a nazi. I know you're opus dei.

Ah, I see. Interesting.

I wonder why the school "resource officer" ( translation, resident pig ) was summoned to arrest the kid for assault?

This 11 year old was arrested and charged after kicking a trash can!

https://www.pri.org/stories/2015-04-10/h...6th-grader

Quote:How kicking a trash can became criminal for a 6th grader

Say..... you don't suppose it is because the 11 year old was black, do you?

(October 26, 2017 at 10:01 pm)Minimalist Wrote: I wonder why the school "resource officer" ( translation, resident pig ) was summoned to arrest the kid for assault?

This 11 year old was arrested and charged after kicking a trash can!

https://www.pri.org/stories/2015-04-10/h...6th-grader

Quote:How kicking a trash can became criminal for a 6th grader

Say..... you don't suppose it is because the 11 year old was black, do you?

I hope there are riots because of that.

It would never occur to me to not stand for the anthem, unless it were required to do so.

Same with flag burning, I'd never do it unless it was illegal to do so.

Curiously, I would go fucking nuclear on someone burning a rainbow flag . . .

(October 26, 2017 at 10:22 pm)Court Jester Wrote:

(October 26, 2017 at 10:01 pm)Minimalist Wrote: I wonder why the school "resource officer" ( translation, resident pig ) was summoned to arrest the kid for assault?

This 11 year old was arrested and charged after kicking a trash can!

https://www.pri.org/stories/2015-04-10/h...6th-grader



Say..... you don't suppose it is because the 11 year old was black, do you?

I hope there are riots because of that.

You would.  Anything to give your pig cops a free fire zone, eh?