So it's just the American flag with "shameful history"? All the other nations are free and clear. What a bunch of BS.
What does the confederate flag mean to you?
- Thread starter Chrysippus
- Start date
temptotalk
Legendary Member
So it's just the American flag with "shameful history"? All the other nations are free and clear. What a bunch of BS.
Is that an admission of the shameful past history of america?
temptotalk
Legendary Member
Is it a problem that america's horrible history is pointed out and displayed for what it is?
temptotalk
Legendary Member
Does that imply that i'm not american? Did you just make an assumption about someone you've never personally met? Which i might add is a sure sign of ignorance? What exactly did i say to cause that assumption? Please explain your bias. And you never answered the question. Is it wrong to point out the correct and often horrible history of america? George Carlin did it. He even mentioned all the races damn near wiped out by white americans through history.
Or is this an emotional reaction. Somehow you being so closely attached to ideals that mere mention of something you disagree with sends you into an emotional panic in which you cannot control yourself? How in control of your emotions are you? What does needing help in anyway have to do with opinions and ideals? If someone doesn't like a place does that mean something horrible should happen to them? If so, if you do think thats a proper way to go. Does that make you a horrible human being?
Would you rather the history of america be faked or hidden? Wouldn't that run in direct contradiction to your principals of transparency? How is it that you want transparency in one area but not another? Have any threes? In a thread about the confederate flag would it be unreasonable to talk about america's history? If so, why? Is it not relevant to the topic? Do you know what relevant means?
twoton
Superior Member
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2011
- Posts
- 7,865
- Media
- 1
- Likes
- 8,304
- Points
- 268
- Location
- Mid Atlantic
- Sexuality
- 99% Straight, 1% Gay
- Gender
- Male
So it's just the American flag with "shameful history"? All the other nations are free and clear. What a bunch of BS.
We've done shameful things, no doubt. But as for the U.S.A. vs. C.S.A. flags--we won. So we get to choose which flag we fly. And we choose.......ours.
I live in NY. Saw one flying from a house in my neighborhood. I thought to myself, very good to know. I told my kids to stay away from that house and those people. They have a right to put their values on display and I have a right to keep away from them. Works for me.
Aren't you full of questions. Let's get this straight I have no issues with discussing the history of this country. I
Obviously you like to respond with questions. Please see attached.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Question_dodging
temptotalk
Legendary Member
I'm thinking that the general problem here is the we part in your And we choose ours statement.
I am curious, temptotalk. In another post you appeared to get very defensive when someone made a comment and you inferred from it that you weren't an American. In this post you seem to imply that you aren't an American, since you word it in such a way that you distance yourself from the "we" part of "And we choose.......ours". And, you list yourself from "Thirdlegdia".
So, which way is it? Are you a US citizen? If so, do you consider yourself part of the United States, or, do you consider yourself as part of the Confederate States?
I ask so that we can stop dancing around the pronouns of "we" and "them".
As for @twoton 's comment, the victor always gets to choose how to portray history. Consider the line from the play, 1776 ... "A rebellion is always legal in the first person, such as “our rebellion.” It is only in the third person – “their rebellion” – that it becomes illegal."
History is always revisioned, even if it is just to gloss over the parts that aren't too pretty. I'm sure, at the time, Germany didn't call it "VE Day".
temptotalk
Legendary Member
I didn't get defensive. What i said, i said to prove a point.
de·fen·sive
dəˈfensiv/
adjective
- used or intended to defend or protect.
"troops in defensive positions"
synonyms: defending, protective; More - very anxious to challenge or avoid criticism.
"he was very defensive about that side of his life"
synonyms: self-justifying, oversensitive, prickly, paranoid, neurotic;
informaluptight
"a defensive response"
Did that comment NOT imply that i wasn't an american? Are am i taking crazy pills? I asked an extremely easy question. A few easily answerable questions. Instead of answering the last one, i was met with the above quoted comment. I don't know if you know this but it wasn't an answer. He replied with a snarky assumption not only about me but about the opinion i hadn't even expressed yet. And now, you think i was being defensive?
This is what i said about being an america.
Now explain to me what i distanced myself from. All i did was ask questions. If you and others are afraid to answer those questions then thats on you. Oh and i wasn't dancing around pronouns. There are many many types of americans out there. And they also have a say in how america goes forward. As in every race, gender and sexuality. Meaning their opinions should also count in this discussion.
And yeah, revision is one thing. Rewriting is something different.
@temptotalk Thank you for posting a reply, however, you were non-responsive.
I asked you a direct question and you chose not to answer. You can hardly expect people to answer you, if you won't answer them.
Now for the clarifications to you reply... I didn't say you "were defensive", but rather that you "appeared to get defensive". That was the way your reply read to me, and that is how I read most of your replies. I read them that way because never directly answer a question, but avoid it by firing back a series of questions. You then assume the answer to your own question and ask a follow up question based on that assumption, and so on.
Example:
In a court, you'd be admonished for badgering a witness.
My suggestion, aside from giving people the courtesy to respond, would be to answer a few of the direct questions that have been put to you, like....
Are you a citizen of the US? And, if you are, do you consider yourself part of the United States or Confederate States?
(I'll answer your direct questions, in the next post.)
I asked you a direct question and you chose not to answer. You can hardly expect people to answer you, if you won't answer them.
Now for the clarifications to you reply... I didn't say you "were defensive", but rather that you "appeared to get defensive". That was the way your reply read to me, and that is how I read most of your replies. I read them that way because never directly answer a question, but avoid it by firing back a series of questions. You then assume the answer to your own question and ask a follow up question based on that assumption, and so on.
Example:
"Does that imply that i'm not american?"
(Your question is simple, but you never waited for a response.)
"Did you just make an assumption about someone you've never personally met?"
(You assumed he did imply it and question his assumption having never met you.)
"Which i might add is a sure sign of ignorance?"
(You did not wait for an answer and assumed him ignorant.)
"What exactly did i say to cause that assumption?"
(You assumed you did something to cause him to assume.)
...
"Or is this an emotional reaction."
(Before resolving the first set of issues, you started a new set of questions.)
"Somehow you being so closely attached to ideals that mere mention of something you disagree with sends you into an emotional panic in which you cannot control yourself?"
(Without waiting for a response, you assumed (a) that he was "closely attached"; (b) he disagreed; (c) he was in an emotional "panic"; and (d) couldn't control himself.)
"How in control of your emotions are you?"
(Then after accusing him of being out of control, you questioned whether he was in control.)
"What does needing help in anyway have to do with opinions and ideals?"
(You jumped to a conclusion about someone "needing help" and assumed they were connected to opinions and ideals.)
"If someone doesn't like a place does that mean something horrible should happen to them?"
(You jumped to a new line of thought, questioning the connection between liking a place and whether something should happen.)
"If so, if you do think thats a proper way to go. Does that make you a horrible human being?"
(You failed to wait for any response and assumed a positive response and linking that to the quality of a person's character.)
...
Would you rather the history of america be faked or hidden?
(Still not waiting for a reply, you shifted again to a new perspective and set of attack-style question.)
Wouldn't that run in direct contradiction to your principals of transparency?
(You assumed he responded in the positive, again, and followed up by assuming that he had "prinicp[les] of transparency. You then chose another attack-style question to challenge those princip[ples].)
How is it that you want transparency in one area but not another?
(Again, you assumed he wanted transparency, but only limited. Still not waiting for a response to the first question (which was, did he imply you weren't an American.)
...
In a thread about the confederate flag would it be unreasonable to talk about america's history?
(Again, not waiting for a response to any of your other questions, you moved onto another perspective.)
If so, why?
(You asked for elaboration, even though you have not allowed him to even respond, nevermind that elaborate.)
Is it not relevant to the topic?
(You asked a passive-aggressive or leading style question, having made an assumption that his response was negative.)
Do you know what relevant means?
(You got insulting challenging his vocabulary.)
(Your question is simple, but you never waited for a response.)
"Did you just make an assumption about someone you've never personally met?"
(You assumed he did imply it and question his assumption having never met you.)
"Which i might add is a sure sign of ignorance?"
(You did not wait for an answer and assumed him ignorant.)
"What exactly did i say to cause that assumption?"
(You assumed you did something to cause him to assume.)
...
"Or is this an emotional reaction."
(Before resolving the first set of issues, you started a new set of questions.)
"Somehow you being so closely attached to ideals that mere mention of something you disagree with sends you into an emotional panic in which you cannot control yourself?"
(Without waiting for a response, you assumed (a) that he was "closely attached"; (b) he disagreed; (c) he was in an emotional "panic"; and (d) couldn't control himself.)
"How in control of your emotions are you?"
(Then after accusing him of being out of control, you questioned whether he was in control.)
"What does needing help in anyway have to do with opinions and ideals?"
(You jumped to a conclusion about someone "needing help" and assumed they were connected to opinions and ideals.)
"If someone doesn't like a place does that mean something horrible should happen to them?"
(You jumped to a new line of thought, questioning the connection between liking a place and whether something should happen.)
"If so, if you do think thats a proper way to go. Does that make you a horrible human being?"
(You failed to wait for any response and assumed a positive response and linking that to the quality of a person's character.)
...
Would you rather the history of america be faked or hidden?
(Still not waiting for a reply, you shifted again to a new perspective and set of attack-style question.)
Wouldn't that run in direct contradiction to your principals of transparency?
(You assumed he responded in the positive, again, and followed up by assuming that he had "prinicp[les] of transparency. You then chose another attack-style question to challenge those princip[ples].)
How is it that you want transparency in one area but not another?
(Again, you assumed he wanted transparency, but only limited. Still not waiting for a response to the first question (which was, did he imply you weren't an American.)
...
In a thread about the confederate flag would it be unreasonable to talk about america's history?
(Again, not waiting for a response to any of your other questions, you moved onto another perspective.)
If so, why?
(You asked for elaboration, even though you have not allowed him to even respond, nevermind that elaborate.)
Is it not relevant to the topic?
(You asked a passive-aggressive or leading style question, having made an assumption that his response was negative.)
Do you know what relevant means?
(You got insulting challenging his vocabulary.)
In a court, you'd be admonished for badgering a witness.
My suggestion, aside from giving people the courtesy to respond, would be to answer a few of the direct questions that have been put to you, like....
Are you a citizen of the US? And, if you are, do you consider yourself part of the United States or Confederate States?
(I'll answer your direct questions, in the next post.)
I didn't read it that way.
I would have no way of knowing what, if anything you are taking. No reason to ask me.
I do know whether or not it is an answer.
10silverdollars
Cherished Member
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2015
- Posts
- 357
- Media
- 0
- Likes
- 308
- Points
- 73
- Location
- West Coast
- Sexuality
- 100% Straight, 0% Gay
- Gender
- Male
Part of the difficulties I have with responding to you is that you never directly give your opinions, but express them, instead, in the form of your questions.
Yes. For the reasons I laid out in an earlier post.
You chose the wrong quote for my inference that you were distancing yourself. Here is the quote I was referring to:
And since you continue to distinguish "we" and "your" and, since you choose to challenge that part of the idea, it suggests that you exclude yourself from the "we", since you could have chosen to include yourself by saying, "part of our problem is". And so, I asked for clarification.
As you can see, I am not afraid to answer questions. That assumption is yours, sir.
Again, your choice of the pronoun "they" suggests you do not include yourself. You could have said, "And we also have a say", but chose not to.
My choice of expression and the question prior shows my point. You are choosing your pronouns.
No one is saying you (or anyone else) can't share their opinions, however, they carry the same weight as others. That is, the weight that your words persuade.
Now I've answered yours.... you answer mine.
temptotalk
Legendary Member
This post has been removed by the LPSG moderating team as it was found to be in violation with our rules regarding trolling. http://www.lpsg.com/terms/
Similar threads
