Seriously thoughtful Unbelievable! (not allowed to show the flag)

[netseeker]

Originally Posted by Moejoe

Another little fascist comes out of the closet.

Originally Posted by Moejoe

you get double the racist, jingoist, bullshit for half the price this year.

Such a behaviour is inacceptable and inexcusable for any MobileRead member! Why don't you take the time to read our posting guidelines? Try to understand, accept and respect them!

Dear members, this thread's topic seems to be a controversial subject but please play nice and post according to our guidelines. Otherwise we will have to close this thread.

Michael
(moderator)

[Moejoe]

Originally Posted by netseeker

Such a behaviour is inacceptable and inexcusable for any MobileRead member! Why don't you take the time to read posting guidelines? Try to understand, accept and respect them!

Dear members, this thread's topic seems to be a controversial subject but please play nice and post according to our guidelines. Otherwise we will have to close this thread.

Michael
(moderator)

Why don't you ban me then? Because I never saw any kind of outburst like this when a certain someone advocated genocide openly.

[kindlekitten]

Originally Posted by netseeker

Such a behaviour is inacceptable and inexcusable for any MobileRead member! Why don't you take the time to read our posting guidelines? Try to understand, accept and respect them!

Dear members, this thread's topic seems to be a controversial subject but please play nice and post according to our guidelines. Otherwise we will have to close this thread.

Michael
(moderator)

it has managed to stay a very civilized thread for the most part up until now. would it be possible to simply delete the ravings and let us carry on?

Originally Posted by Moejoe

Why don't you ban me then? Because I never saw any kind of outburst like this when a certain someone advocated genocide openly.

I can't tell if you are drunk or what the issue is. most people have enough self control to just walk away from something they don't like rather than cry to be banned. borrow a line from your hero. turn and walk away. be a man about it.

[netseeker]

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

it has managed to stay a very civilized thread for the most part up until now.

I know. That's why i didn't close it yet.

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

would it be possible to simply delete the ravings and let us carry on?

Thank's for the suggestion. We will consider it. Please (this means all posters) ignore the "ravings" for now while we moderators are deliberating on the matter.

[Bilbo1967]

Can I put the alternative view please?

Censorship is very rarely justified (and am I the only one who thinks that KK's call for censorship is pretty ironic given her signature?), and in this particular case I believe that Moejoe's point is that far worse things have been written here uncensored (or even censured). I can, of course, provide links and/or quotes of those if required.

Retrospectively deleting members' posts opens a whole can of worms, which just can't be a good thing.

[Spoon Man]

Bilbo, I agree with you on this. We shouldn't delete his posts, nor discount his beliefs, just the way in which he expresses them. There is a time and a place for such, and this is not it.

[TGS]

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

would it be possible to simply delete the ravings and let us carry on?

When Freedoms are chiseled away, freedom of speech is the first to go.

[netseeker]

Please get back to topic as requested by the OP.

The different views regarding the deletion of posts are perceived. Be assured that no hasty decision will be made on the matter. If anybody else want express her/his own view regarding the suggested deletion of posts then please send a private message to the moderator of your choice. Thank you.

Michael

[kindlekitten]

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

it has managed to stay a very civilized thread for the most part up until now. would it be possible to simply delete the ravings and let us carry on?




I can't tell if you are drunk or what the issue is. most people have enough self control to just walk away from something they don't like rather than cry to be banned. borrow a line from your hero. turn and walk away. be a man about it.

Originally Posted by Bilbo1967

Can I put the alternative view please?

Censorship is very rarely justified (and am I the only one who thinks that KK's call for censorship is pretty ironic given her signature?), and in this particular case I believe that Moejoe's point is that far worse things have been written here uncensored (or even censured). I can, of course, provide links and/or quotes of those if required.

Retrospectively deleting members' posts opens a whole can of worms, which just can't be a good thing.

Originally Posted by TGS

because I truly believe that which I highlighted. ok? not trying to censor, don't think he is thinking correctly

[kennyc]

Hmmm...

[Kolenka]

Originally Posted by Logseman

The matter itself is simple, and a beaten horse in this thread, even, but I feel it's good to repeat it: if the flag is his, and the space where he is to display it is his, he can put a US flag, a Union Jack, a rainbow LGBT flag or a Hakenkreuz if that's his liking.

The problem is that this is an apartment complex. The veteran in this case pays rent, instead of being an owner with a lien against the property (a.k.a mortgage). The rules are quite different in that the space is not actually his. With a mortgage, the lien holder isn't actually given status of legal owner unless the owner defaults on the mortgage.

He pays rent, and so receives some protections from the state to prevent abusive landlords, but because he doesn't have his name on the deed, he isn't the one who can say what can and can't be done with the property, or even inside the apartment itself in some cases. So unfortunately, the legal situation is even more clear cut short of changes to current law: the company and owner of the property can ask him to take it down from being displayed in public, in the window. I'd agree it is a boneheaded move, but it is a boneheaded move that company is free to make, and lose this guy's business in the future.

I'm not sure I'd advocate for intervening in this sort of situation with more legal regulation, for various reasons.

Originally Posted by Logseman

HOWEVER, isn't it thought-provoking that national flags are usually hijacked by bloodthirsty jingoists who prostitute their use until any decent citizen refuses to let it have a space in his/her life? And isn't it thought-provoking that it happens everywhere, in the US, the UK, in Spain in my case, in Germany from what I've seen in the year I've spent there, and so on?

Symbols will always get "hijacked" by some cause, and the term hijacked used more if we don't agree with the stance of that cause. The stars and stripes were originally the sign of rebellion and defiance. We look back at that romantically because it birthed a nation free of the British system which prevented colonies of Britain from participating in British government while being taxed at the same time. The Confederate flag is a bit more controversial because it has been used to symbolize both the evils of slavery, and the positive ideal to be free of someone else's standards and demands.

A symbol is just that, a symbol. Because it gets used by villainous groups doesn't make it hijacked, per se... just that they symbol they chose wound up being associated with bad deeds. And people tend to remember the warnings and bad omens more than the positives.

[Logseman]

From what you say, the space where he put his flag was not his, so he had no legitimacy to put the flag. The matter is crystal clear.

From the other side, I know that symbols and their meaning is always altered... but isn't it always, and I'd add necessarily the case, that national flags become associated with all those things that the states under those flags do?

[Kolenka]

Originally Posted by Logseman

From the other side, I know that symbols and their meaning is always altered... but isn't it always, and I'd add necessarily the case, that national flags become associated with all those things that the states under those flags do?

Of course, the only difference between a government, and any cause or organization is the sheer scale of it. And the scale tends to mean that you get more different viewpoints within that organization. And especially if you are an external observer (as we've already seen in this very thread), the symbol can actually mean many different things based on your exposure to the group the symbol represents.

But what I'm trying to say is that a symbol is remembered more prominently for the evil done in its name, rather than the good. And this is more of a physiological phenomenon than a cultural one. It's a survival instinct linked with recognition. Seeing a swastika pre-WWII usually meant you were exposed to cultures that originated in the region of India. Today, it is more a sign that you might want to leave that bar you've decided to try out.

We can call it "hijacking" if we like, but would we still call it hijacking if someone tried to co-opt the swastika again and turn it into a positive symbol? The term itself is loaded, and carries a heavy connotation is another point I'm trying to get across.

So, if we mix this bias we have where we can recognize the negative aspects linked to a symbol very quickly, along with every major nation having their dark spots in their past... and pretty much everything looks to be a symbol that got hijacked for evil.

[WT Sharpe]

Kolenka makes a valid point. I don't want to open a can of worms here, but the Swastika is an ancient and revered symbol in many Eastern religions, and can still be seen in those lands where those religions flourish. It's a shame that Hitler and the Nazis decided to usurp the symbol for their own purposes; but when one sees a Swastika, it can't always be assumed that it's a display of Neo-Nazi activity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika

[kindlekitten]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

Kolenka makes a valid point. I don't want to open a can of worms here, but the Swastika is an ancient and revered symbol in many Eastern religions, and can still be seen in those lands where those religions flourish. It's a shame that Hitler and the Nazis decided to usurp the symbol for their own purposes; but when one sees a Swastika, it can't always be assumed that it's a display of Neo-Nazi activity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika

it's also a traditional Navajo symbol. when I was growing up we had a BUNCH of traditional wool rugs around the house and unfortunately I learned about Nazis long before I learned native lore. one of the rugs had a reversed swastika on it (not that I realized it was reversed). I was terrified that my family were secret nazis until I was about 10