Statues and Sports Team Names

How should society be organised, if at all?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Gary Childress
Posts: 2021
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
Location: The Domain of Confusion

Re: Statues and Sports Team Names

Post by Gary Childress »

Gloominary wrote: Mon Jul 13, 2020 11:25 pm If you unlawfully tear down a statue, you're not a peaceful protestor, you're a vandal, and you should be imprisoned.

These things must be decided democratically, not by a mob.
I don't know. By much the same token ("mob" justice), The Berlin Wall was officially demolished beginning in June of 1990--ending an era in European history that was pretty bad for a lot of people. However, parts of it had already been wrecked by ordinary citizens as early as November of 1989. I don't think those ordinary citizens were just a pack of "vandals". There was no official vote on taking down the wall at that time and, at first, the border guards tried to repair the damage. It seems to me that what those people did was justified. Over the course of months, as with city commissions and the Confederate statues, East Germany had been dragging its feet on the change. Finally, they gave in to the "mob".
There's nothing necessarily offensive about confederate statues or the confederate flag, they fly the flag to celebrate their culture and states' rights, not to celebrate slavery.
I'm not a black person, however, I can understand if some black people, to whatever extent or degree, would rather not have Confederate statues up in their home cities and towns. The transatlantic slave trade was a horrible atrocity, accounting for the deaths and servitude of millions. Local governments haven't been forthcoming in taking the statues down. So, as with the Berlin wall, some people took it on themselves.

Many of the statues were erected during the Jim Crow era. Most of them were of cheap construction so they could be put up quickly and inexpensively, which is why so many of them break up into pieces when they hit the ground. They're not exactly quality works of art. And while they technically don't "celebrate slavery", they do honor the deeds of men who rebelled against our nation in order to preserve something that was contrary to our very Constitution.
As for team names like the redskins, there's nothing necessarily offensive about them either, anymore than the Minnesota Vikings is offensive.
According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary online, "redskin" is considered offensive. I'll go with what they say. Technically the N-word is simply derived from the Latin word for "black". Surely the term "black" is not offensive. However, it seems to me that the N-word is pretty offensive regardless.
But the liberal elite and their goons don't care about anyone or anything but themselves, so why should anyone care about them, what they think or value?
There are definitely some elites who are liberal, however, it's a bit like asking which you would prefer, an elite person who has some compassion toward minorities and poorer citizens or an elite person who thinks everything is as it should be and doesn't have much compassion? Granted some of the liberal elite probably just pay lip service to a lot of things but occasionally they are compelled to act on it.

As far as other names of sports teams like the Chiefs, Braves, Indians, and Blackhawks, they're not defined in the dictionary as offensive, so I would agree with you there that it seems kind of petty to me to demand changing them. So I do agree that some stuff that is going on right now seems to go too far, to the point of just being divisive and counterproductive for no good reason.
Gloominary
Posts: 250
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2017 11:10 pm

Re: Statues and Sports Team Names

Post by Gloominary »

Gary
I don't know. By much the same token ("mob" justice), The Berlin Wall was officially demolished beginning in June of 1990--ending an era in European history that was pretty bad for a lot of people. However, parts of it had already been wrecked by ordinary citizens as early as November of 1989. I don't think those ordinary citizens were just a pack of "vandals". There was no official vote on taking down the wall at that time and, at first, the border guards tried to repair the damage. It seems to me that what those people did was justified. Over the course of months, as with city commissions and the Confederate statues, East Germany had been dragging its feet on the change. Finally, they gave in to the "mob".
It was a different time/place.
East Germany didn't have democracy, and the vast majority of people were probably glad to see the wall go.

People in glass houses...
Conservatives may start tearing up shit libs venerate.
I'm not a black person, however, I can understand if some black people, to whatever extent or degree, would rather not have Confederate statues up in their home cities and towns. The transatlantic slave trade was a horrible atrocity, accounting for the deaths and servitude of millions. Local governments haven't been forthcoming in taking the statues down. So, as with the Berlin wall, some people took it on themselves.
And I can understand why the Trump admin wants to defend them.
I can understand why Italians defended statues of Columbus.

Live by the sword...
Many of the statues were erected during the Jim Crow era. Most of them were of cheap construction so they could be put up quickly and inexpensively, which is why so many of them break up into pieces when they hit the ground. They're not exactly quality works of art. And while they technically don't "celebrate slavery", they do honor the deeds of men who rebelled against our nation in order to preserve something that was contrary to our very Constitution.
One man's fart is another man's art.

States still have the constitutional right to secede, the real rebels were the unionists.
According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary online, "redskin" is considered offensive. I'll go with what they say. Technically the N-word is simply derived from the Latin word for "black". Surely the term "black" is not offensive. However, it seems to me that the N-word is pretty offensive regardless.
But the liberal elite and their goons don't care about anyone or anything but themselves, so why should anyone care about them, what they think or value?
Language is (inter)subjective.
Just because dictionaries say so, doesn't make it so.
And just because Native Americans say so, doesn't make it so.
I think most black, and white people consider the word n***** to be offensive (well...depending on context *scratches head*).
However, I'm not sure if most native, and white people consider the word redskin to be offensive.
I don't consider it to be offensive.
I'm not going to allow minorities to dictate our language to us.
My ancestors created the English language, so if anything, what descendants of Anglo-Saxons think of it is more important than what natives think of it.
There are definitely some elites who are liberal, however, it's a bit like asking which you would prefer, an elite person who has some compassion toward minorities and poorer citizens or an elite person who thinks everything is as it should be and doesn't have much compassion? Granted some of the liberal elite probably just pay lip service to a lot of things but occasionally they are compelled to act on it.
I prefer an elite that either has the same compassion for both minorities and whites, or more for whites.
As far as other names of sports teams like the Chiefs, Braves, Indians, and Blackhawks, they're not defined in the dictionary as offensive, so I would agree with you there that it seems kind of petty to me to demand changing them. So I do agree that some stuff that is going on right now seems to go too far, to the point of just being divisive and counterproductive for no good reason.
Just you wait, they'll change the dictionaries to make Chiefs and so on offensive soon enough.
The liberal cult finds reality offensive.
White skin is now inherently offensive to them.
They will not stop, unless we stop them.
commonsense
Posts: 2823
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: Statues and Sports Team Names

Post by commonsense »

Gloominary wrote: Mon Jul 13, 2020 11:25 pm If you unlawfully tear down a statue, you're a not a peaceful protestor, you're a vandal, and you should be imprisoned.
Yes, or at least a hefty fine to pay for repairing and re-erecting the statue, and then some. OK, jail time if they don’t pay.

Gloominary wrote: Mon Jul 13, 2020 11:25 pm These things must be decided democratically, not by a mob.
I disagree. To see why I say so, see my post above.

Gloominary wrote: Mon Jul 13, 2020 11:25 pm There's nothing necessarily offensive about confederate statues or the confederate flag, they fly the confederate flag to celebrate their culture and state's rights, not to celebrate slavery.
Here’s where you went wrong. There’s indeed something intrinsically offensive about these celebrations.

Haters and others celebrate the buying and selling of humans when they celebrate the culture of Dixie by flag or by statue.

Humans were enslaved, whipped and raped in order to give life to that culture.

The flag of the several states who tried to separate from the union of Americans is a symbol of the culture that was built on slavery and the abuse of human beings.

The statues memorialize a war that would have allowed states rights to enslave people, had the Confederacy not lost.

Gloominary wrote: Mon Jul 13, 2020 11:25 pm As for team names like the redskins, there's nothing necessarily offensive about them, anymore than the Minnesota Vikings is offensive.
There’s nothing derogatory about the term “vikings” whereas “redskins” is an epithet that attempts to manufacture fear of a so-called subhuman species of savages who scalp and torture good white people.

Gloominary wrote: Mon Jul 13, 2020 11:25 pm But the liberal elite and their goons don't care about anyone or anything but themselves, so why should anyone care about them, what they think or value?
The elite, I.e. the smartest and the brightest, care about American values, such as the belief that all are born with equal footing and equal respect.

Others should care, too.
Gloominary
Posts: 250
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2017 11:10 pm

Re: Statues and Sports Team Names

Post by Gloominary »

Common
Yes, or at least a hefty fine to pay for repairing and re-erecting the statue, and then some. OK, jail time if they don’t pay.
Right
Here’s where you went wrong. There’s indeed something intrinsically offensive about these celebrations.

Haters and others celebrate the buying and selling of humans when they celebrate the culture of Dixie by flag or by statue.

Humans were enslaved, whipped and raped in order to give life to that culture.

The flag of the several states who tried to separate from the union of Americans is a symbol of the culture that was built on slavery and the abuse of human beings.

The statues memorialize a war that would have allowed states rights to enslave people, had the Confederacy not lost.
That's how you see it through your subjective prism.

That's not how most southerners see it.
There’s nothing derogatory about the term “vikings” whereas “redskins” is an epithet that attempts to manufacture fear of a so-called subhuman species of savages who scalp and torture good white people.
Again, that's how you see it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washingto ... nion_polls

The liberal elite is telling native Americans what they find offensive, it isn't asking them.

Why?

Because they're power hungry assholes, trying to stir up shit, that's why.

These people need to be deposed.
The elite, I.e. the smartest and the brightest, care about American values, such as the belief that all are born with equal footing and equal respect.
While I think we're all equal enough that we should have equal rights, we're not absolutely equal, there's no such thing as absolute equality in nature, men and women are different, we have different strengths, weaknesses and preferences, and the same is true of cultures and races.
User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 2145
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Statues and Sports Team Names

Post by RCSaunders »

Gloominary wrote: Tue Jul 14, 2020 3:53 pm While I think we're all equal enough that we should have equal rights, we're not absolute equal, men and women are different, we haven't different strengths, weaknesses and preferences, ...
Up to here, you are right. Every individual human being is different from every other human being with different abilities, interests, and objectives in life, but...
Gloominary wrote: Tue Jul 14, 2020 3:53 pm ... the same is true of cultures and races.
is pure racism and a very bad mistake. Individuals cannot be evaluated based of some presumed assignment to some nebulous ethnicity. If, by culture, you include beliefs, those differences can be evaluated because individuals declare for themselves what they are. So-called race, nationality, or any other genetic identification means nothing.
Gloominary
Posts: 250
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2017 11:10 pm

Re: Statues and Sports Team Names

Post by Gloominary »

RC
is pure racism and a very bad mistake. Individuals cannot be evaluated based of some presumed assignment to some nebulous ethnicity. If, by culture, you include beliefs, those differences can be evaluated because individuals declare for themselves what they are. So-called race, nationality, or any other genetic identification means nothing.
Nature is nebulous.
Even individuality is a bit nebulous.
Geological features are vague, where does one begin and the other end?
The human body is vague, are hands social constructs, are arms?
Where does one begin and the other end, exactly?
Everything in nature is fluid, fuzzy, approximate, relative, doesn't mean we can't think or talk about them, just means there's always going to be a lot of subjectivity and artistry involved.
We oughtn't think about nature the way we think about mathematics or formal logic.
Gloominary
Posts: 250
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2017 11:10 pm

Re: Statues and Sports Team Names

Post by Gloominary »

I'm not saying we should use race to evaluate an individual, especially if we've already gotten to know them as an individual, or we have the time to get to know them as an individual.
What I am saying is, just as no two individuals, even if they're identical twins, are exactly the same macrologically or even genetically, no two population groups are exactly the same, they're going to differ, not just in a few ways, but in every way, more or less.

For example how could one population group have the exact same collective intelligence as another?
If you added up the iQ of every individual within population group 1, person 1 within population group 1 has an iQ of 85, person 2 has 100, that's 185, person 3 has 95, that's 280 and so on, how could population group 1 get the exact same collective iQ score as population group 2, it's impossible (or next to it, and iQ itself is a, useful simplification and parsing of intelligence), and iQ, like a lot of other traits, has meaningful implications for socioeconomic achievement, however big or small.
It's impossible for any two things to be absolutely identical, let alone things as complex as population groups, the only question is by how much do they differ?
This is just one of the ways the modern left is way off.

They think if a minority or women are worse off in any way than the majority or men, it must be because of racism and sexism, but if a minority or women are better off in any way, they ignore that.
And if they do manage to find a bit of actual racism within an institution or society as a whole, they throw the baby out with the bathwater.
This leads to an extreme, revolutionary form of racial, sexual and gender socialism, where no variability in outcome can be permitted.
commonsense
Posts: 2823
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: RO

Post by commonsense »

henry quirk wrote: Tue Jul 14, 2020 12:16 am 1. American values are swell.

Describe those values. List them.


2. Opposition to American values is unAmerican.

Dissent is un-american?


3. My country - love it or leave it.

Very conservative of you.
No need to list American values—they’re in the Declaration and the Preamble.

The right to dissent is American, as noted in the First Amendment. But to speak against American values is to speak against America. While the act of dissent is rightful, the content of the consent may be anti- or un-American.

Love it or leave it can be used as anti-lib or anti-con
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 9261
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

Re: Statues and Sports Team Names

Post by henry quirk »

No need to list American values—they’re in the Declaration and the Preamble.

Here ya go...

"We hold these truths to be sacred & undeniable; that all men are created equal & independent, that from that equal creation they derive rights inherent & inalienable, among which are the preservation of life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness."

...Jefferson's orignal (which I prefer), which derived from Locke's Life, Liberty, Property.

Ain't nuthin' in either formulation about hurt feeling or offended sensibilities or kissin' Karl's dead ass or apologizin' for sins committed by others or lettin' garbage people destroy public or private property.


The right to dissent is American, as noted in the First Amendment. But to speak against American values is to speak against America. While the act of dissent is rightful, the content of the consent may be anti- or un-American.

I'm generalizin' of course, but: right now it's *protestors violatin' American values.


Love it or leave it can be used as anti-lib or anti-con

You're wrong, but that's okay: me and mine ain't goin' nowhere.









*riotin' pieces of pampered shit; commies (mostly dupes and sympathizers with a smatterin' of card carriers); lil girls & boys; useful idiots
commonsense
Posts: 2823
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: Statues and Sports Team Names

Post by commonsense »

henry quirk wrote: Wed Jul 15, 2020 11:46 pm No need to list American values—they’re in the Declaration and the Preamble.

Here ya go...

"We hold these truths to be sacred & undeniable; that all men are created equal & independent, that from that equal creation they derive rights inherent & inalienable, among which are the preservation of life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness."

...Jefferson's orignal (which I prefer), which derived from Locke's Life, Liberty, Property.

Ain't nuthin' in either formulation about hurt feeling or offended sensibilities or kissin' Karl's dead ass or apologizin' for sins committed by others or lettin' garbage people destroy public or private property.

Correct. They’re not universally American, as evidenced by your displeasure with them. But I focused only on the one about equality—one which is in the founding documents.

The right to dissent is American, as noted in the First Amendment. But to speak against American values is to speak against America. While the act of dissent is rightful, the content of the consent may be anti- or un-American.

I'm generalizin' of course, but: right now it's *protestors violatin' American values.

Which totally American values are being violated by the protesters?

Love it or leave it can be used as anti-lib or anti-con

You're wrong, but that's okay: me and mine ain't goin' nowhere.

The phrase has been used by the cons, but either side can tell the other side to get out of Dodge.


*riotin' pieces of pampered shit; commies (mostly dupes and sympathizers with a smatterin' of card carriers); lil girls & boys; useful idiots
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 9261
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

Re: Statues and Sports Team Names

Post by henry quirk »

I focused only on the one about equality—one which is in the founding documents.

And?


Which totally *American values are being violated by the **protesters?

Life (by way of murder), Liberty (by way of murder), Pursuit of Happiness (by way of murder), Property (destruction of ptivate & public properties).


either side can tell the other side to get out of Dodge.

True.









*I think Life, Liberty, Property are universal values extendin' out of the fact a man belongs to himself so it's wrong to leash him or use him as resource...what makes such things American is that no other place so thoroughly incorporates these notions (as I say, not always successfully or evenly but we're tryin' Ringo)

**garbage people
commonsense
Posts: 2823
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: Statues and Sports Team Names

Post by commonsense »

And? I’m just saying that’s the only one I was talking about, and being against the protesters would mean being against it. I’m not trying to say that the anti-protesters are unAmerican, just that being against equality is an unAmerican act. If you don’t partly agree with this, then I just haven’t expressed it well.

I understand about property, but what do you mean by by way of murder on the other values?
commonsense
Posts: 2823
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: Statues and Sports Team Names

Post by commonsense »

henry quirk wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 2:02 am
*I think Life, Liberty, Property are universal values extendin' out of the fact a man belongs to himself so it's wrong to leash him or use him as resource...what makes such things American is that no other place so thoroughly incorporates these notions (as I say, not always successfully or evenly but we're tryin' Ringo)
AMEN.
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 9261
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

Re: Statues and Sports Team Names

Post by henry quirk »

I’m just saying that’s the only one I was talking about, and being against the protesters would mean being against it.

I get it now: you actually believe the rioters when they say black lives matter and claim to be anti-facist.

Well, okay...carry on.


what do you mean by by way of murder on the other values?

If you kill a woman just cuz she sez all lives matter you've deprived her of Life, Liberty, and Property.

If you kill a one year old in a protest-related drive-by, you've deprived him of Life, Liberty, and Property.

If you beat an old man to death just cuz he had the bad luck to be on the street when you decided to protest, you've deprived him of Life, Liberty, and Property.

and on and on and on...
commonsense
Posts: 2823
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: Statues and Sports Team Names

Post by commonsense »

henry quirk wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 2:34 am I’m just saying that’s the only one I was talking about, and being against the protesters would mean being against it.

I get it now: you actually believe the rioters when they say black lives matter and claim to be anti-facist.

Well, okay...carry on.


what do you mean by by way of murder on the other values?

If you kill a woman just cuz she sez all lives matter you've deprived her of Life, Liberty, and Property.

If you kill a one year old in a protest-related drive-by, you've deprived him of Life, Liberty, and Property.

If you beat an old man to death just cuz he had the bad luck to be on the street when you decided to protest, you've deprived him of Life, Liberty, and Property.

and on and on and on...
They beat an old man to death???
Post Reply