Sickening

Bill,

I am much more afraid of flag waving than flag burning.

There is a real danger to nationalistic fervor which stifles dissent. It stifles reason and makes decent people accept what normally is unacceptable. During times when the public fear has been whipped up (by both events and people), it is very easy to manipulate public in scary ways with brash patriot symbols.

I fear we are in one of these times.

As Lone brought up it was this type of nationalistic fervor that allowed millions of Germans to close their eyes to one of the most horrific crimes of the century that was being commited by their government.

I am not saying that our government is anything like the Nazi's or is Bush anything close to Hitler. (Lone did give me a convenient example).

But the rise of blind patriotism and the use of nationalistic symbols are similar. The have the same power to change public reason and make decent people accept a tragedy-- and, whatever your opinion on the war, the situation in Iraq is a terrible tragedy.

As far as the photo... I probably wouldn't feel very comfortable with these folks and I don't truly know their beliefs or motivations. But... I defend their right to express anger and dissent, even in this extreme way.

I also feel that there is a responsibility for "progressives", and I do include myself here, to challenge blind patriotism. This often means knocking over the cultural icons that are at the center of a nationalistic fervor.
\

0 Replies

From another wacko lunatic fringe person...

Einstein wrote:

"He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would fully suffice. This disgrace to civilization should be done away with at once. Heroism at command, senseless brutality, deplorable love-of-country stance, how violently I hate all this, how despicable and ignoble war is; I would rather be torn to shreds than be a part of so base an action! It is my conviction that killing under the cloak of war is nothing but an act of murder."

0 Replies

Resistance to authority and refusal to submit to power are the most powerful and most overlooked sources of political change. These activities are outside of normal politics, but, often an integral part of them.

Just look at the civil rights movement. There are tons of examples of the people resisting authority and not submitting to power which led to civil rights legislation that made certain guarantees from the federal and state governments to all people. The timing of the legislation was not a coincidence.

However, there are always the cases of Timmothy McVeigh, where he can blow up a federal building, murder a few hundred people, and not make a god-damn scratch in the political process all while being executed

0 Replies

CerealKiller wrote:

Resistance to authority and refusal to submit to power are the most powerful and most overlooked sources of political change. These activities are outside of normal politics, but, often an integral part of them.

Just look at the civil rights movement. There are tons of examples of the people resisting authority and not submitting to power which led to civil rights legislation that made certain guarantees from the federal and state governments to all people. The timing of the legislation was not a coincidence.

However, there are always the cases of Timmothy McVeigh, where he can blow up a federal building, murder a few hundred people, and not make a god-damn scratch in the political process all while being executed

IMO, everything we see can be traced to political or economic motivations, or both.

No question the blacks benefited both politically (assurance of the right to vote) and economically (assurance of equal opportunity in education and the labor market)

But who else benefited from the Civil Rights movement politically and economically?

0 Replies

ebrown_p wrote:

I am much more afraid of flag waving than flag burning.

I am afraid of neither. Both are simply expressions of free speech. One can be taken too far. One starts out there.

The parallels you are drawing are as absurd as ALV's. America came together and became patriotic again after we were attacked. Nothing unusual about that. There's nothing like a funeral to bring a family together... and only a fool fights in a burning house. Your attempts to paint this patriotic fervor as something sinister is as silly as your Nazi comparison is insulting (or would be if it weren't so silly :wink: ).

ebrown_p wrote:

As far as the photo... I probably wouldn't feel very comfortable with these folks and I don't truly know their beliefs or motivations. But... I defend their right to express anger and dissent, even in this extreme way.

I'd stand shoulder to shoulder with you on that. But not because their message and delivery of same isn't offensive.

ebrown_p wrote:

I also feel that there is a responsibility for "progressives", and I do include myself here, to challenge blind patriotism. This often means knocking over the cultural icons that are at the center of a nationalistic fervor.
\

Your assumption that patriotism is blind in this case is quite misplaced. Bin Ladin opened our eyes... It is you and your crew who choose to close yours to the sins of Saddam and his sons in your desire to vilify our actions. Your use of this war as if it was somehow a prelude to a Nazi-like rule is as absurd as it is obscene.

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

I'm glad you said 'my guess'. Otherwise someone might think you actually put some thought into that completely fictional drivel. Come on ALV, do you really believe that? Did Clinton quash dissent? Are you maybe confusing the desire for rigorous thought in our compatriots with an intolerance for other views?

Clinton?! He was so far away from these people, he couldn't see them if he was the most liberal president ever. And he wasn't. Which helps me with my point.

These 'fringe' members of society are about the most narrow-minded, simplistic, free-speech quashing, dissent-fearing Nazies in the world today.

Have you ever tried to have a converstion with one of these zealots, Duck? I have, and they are more set in their ways then a far-right regious zealot. In fact, 'fringe' members such as these view their political beliefs as if they were relegious anyway, which is why they are so similar......

0 Replies

Let me be perfectly clear about this.

I believe this war-- and the US actions in waging it -- are both tragic and immoral.

As a citizen of the democracy that is waging it, I have every responsibility to do as much as I ethically can to stop it. This is more than an intellectual argument to me. It is a firm conviction I have wrestled with and a very painful wound.

I understand the sins of Saddam and his sons. I don't feel that they change anything about the morality of the US actions.

I do feel that blind patriotism is a problem with this war. I don't feel that Americans are acting or thinking rationally. A symptom of this is that people keep bringing up 9/11 when we are talking about Iraq. I don't feel that this is a prelude to a Nazi type rule.

Bill, I don't expect to convince you here.

But, I want you to understand. I feel my country is commiting a terrible crime. The thousands of lives that are being ruined and lost are not justified by the removal of Saddam.

I love my country. I feel she is horribly, horribly wrong.

0 Replies

Ah, ALV, so your comments were aimed directly at those specific people then? That's not the way I read it, but OK.

0 Replies

ebrown_p wrote:

Quote:

I will remind you that it was the Nazi's who used their flag, national pride, and a call for unity to win the mindless support of the German people. The Nazi's relied on Unity and very efficient at stomping out any "wacko luntic fringe" that would dissent..

Don't you wish there were more of the "wacko lunatic fringe" in Germany at that time?

C'mon, E, quit being so short sighted.

I said if these people were holding power.

Then, yes, they would have their own flag, they would be nationalistic, and they would call for unity (they do that anyway).

And, if these people were holding power they would truly be the Nazis of the 21 century.

Which is why I hope they continued to be viewed by 'Middle America' and moderates as the fascists they are.

But thankfully, they are not in charge. But, if these people were holding power in America today, they would give the Nazis of the 1930's a run for their money.

See? My point being if these people were holding power?

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

Ah, ALV, so your comments were aimed directly at those specific people then? That's not the way I read it, but OK.

I went back and reviewed what I wrote.....

I did mean the 'progressives' in the photos. I can see that you thought I meant all 'progressives', but I didn't. I just meant the most 'progressive' of the 'progressives' we saw in the pictures... Smile

0 Replies

ebrown_p wrote:

I do feel that blind patriotism is a problem with this war. I don't feel that Americans are acting or thinking rationally. A symptom of this is that people keep bringing up 9/11 when we are talking about Iraq. I don't feel that this is a prelude to a Nazi type rule.

Ebrown... I wonder if I could trouble you to read one of Tony Blair's speeches. He explains why September 11th is brought up so often during conversations about Iraq so much better than I ever could... that I decided rather than trying, I'd search for the speech instead. It's not ignorance, like so many liberals like to believe. Please, I implore you. Your time will be better spent then it ever has been reading my dribble. This was one of his best ever.

You can read it by clicking here.

0 Replies

Bookmark

I'll be reading that speach tomorrow.

0 Replies

Bill- I just read that. Wonderful. It is too bad that George Bush is not as capable an orator as Tony Blair. Maybe one of these days people WILL understand!

0 Replies

Phoenix, it was all I could do not to cry when I heard him make that speech... because Bush is such a loser by comparison.

0 Replies

I always thought Tony Blair was much smarter than George. That speech wasn't half bad.

0 Replies

Larry434 wrote:

Craven de Kere wrote:

So basically, you decided to stoop to that level. <shrug>

When in Rome.......

Larry, again the monolithic outlook.

Some are that way some aren't. You can join those who are or seek high ground. The people who post that way are not A2K's stock and store, and you'll probably enjoy discourse around here more if you don't emulate the less savory traits.

0 Replies

Thanks Bill.

0 Replies

Quote:

because Bush is such a loser by comparison.

And there's the rub. He is so wrong on so many things, but is so right on terrorism. And to me, THAT was the most important issue.

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

Phoenix, it was all I could do not to cry when I heard him make that speech... because Bush is such a loser by comparison.

It's kind of refreshing being aproached as a thinking human being. I agree, Blair is much prefrable to Bush. Thank you for posting the speach, I enjoyed reading it.

0 Replies

He's impressive as hell, aint he?

Einherjar, it's essentially the same message as Bush's... he just delivers it better. Idea

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know