White Nationalists v Democratic Socialists!

[LV426]

That has nothing to do with a flag.

Yes, it does, because as you've admitted, that flag is a tool of oppression for white supremacists because of the history of that flag.

Right? You are so concerned with preserving history, so that comes with the warts of the history of that flag and how it was used as a tool of intimidation and oppression, and still is!

 

[SmarterthanYou]

The 1A doesn't protect intimidation.

waving a damned flag isn't intimidation just like wearing a tye dyed shirt isn't intimidation

 

[LV426]

If we banned the flag it would mean we have lost our 1st Amendment rights and fascists had taken control of the U. S.

The 1A doesn't protect intimidation.

The flag's history is that of a tool to advance that intimidation and oppression.

That's the flag's history you are so adamant we preserve. So you argue on the one hand that the flag has a history of being a tool of intimidation and oppression by white supremacists, but then you say on the other hand that you personally aren't intimidated by that so no one else should be.

Do you get the inherent contradiction there, Flash?

 

[LV426]

No, intimidation is determined by the law which you refuse to read.

So OK...when the flags were all erected, who was writing the laws that allowed them to erect those flags? The people who erected them.

So you retreat to this defense of your argument of "well, if it was intimidation, then it would be illegal for them to erect those flags". OK, but the same people erecting those flags were the ones who also decided the flag didn't intimidate anyone. Even though that was the reason for erecting them.

You understand how that worked, or are you going to continue with the sophistry?

 

[LV426]

a while back you proposed an agreement about insults between us..........this is the second time you've reneged on it. should I safely assume you were lying?

You're right. I apologize for that. My bad.

you falsely assume that the confederate flag is nothing but white supremacy

If it isn't white supremacy, why do white supremacists feel it represents their views and beliefs?

which is easily debunked by the numerous pictures of blacks carrying the same flag.

STOP.

 

[LV426]

this is not only a dumb argument, but a dangerous one..............for when would 'intimidation' then be invalid?

NOW you're starting to get it!

Now you're starting to see that intimidation isn't for you to determine, it's for the victim to determine. And that your perspective is just that, yours.

I am going to enjoy watching you discover empathy on this thread.

 

[Flash]

I don't think you're getting it because now you're arguing that intimidation is OK so long as its state sanctioned.

The state makes intimidation illegal. You just refuse to understand what it involves.

The only reason it was "legal" for those people to fly that flag and erect monuments to the men who fought under it was because they wrote the laws that made it possible for them to do so.

It is legal for them to wave a flag because the 1st Amendment protects that right.

Why don't you start a campaign to repeal the 1st Amendment and then we can all decide what intimidates us since you think the victim gets to decide that.

Sanders signs, Trump signs, those that are "intimidated" because a gay man is running for president, those that are intimidated because you attack their political or religious beliefs---that is the logical outcome of your utopia.

 

[LV426]

Well, when somebody waving a Confederate flag tries to force somebody to be a slave we can charge them with intimidation (or false imprisonment).

Ah, so..OK...so then a white supremacist waving the Confederate Flag about is conveying what message?

 

[SmarterthanYou]

You're right. I apologize for that. My bad.

thank you.

If it isn't white supremacy, why do white supremacists feel it represents their views and beliefs?

why do non LGBTQ people wave the rainbow flag? one doesn't have to be a white supremacist in order to have southern pride.............same as one doesn't have to be gay to support gay rights.

STOP.

do I need to post some of those pictures?

 

[SmarterthanYou]

NOW you're starting to get it!

Now you're starting to see that intimidation isn't for you to determine, it's for the victim to determine. And that your perspective is just that, yours.

I am going to enjoy watching you discover empathy on this thread.

dude, i've seen people intimidated by a cat...........how are you going to stop that? outlaw cats or make a crime about using cats as a weapon? it has zero to do with what you're referring to

 

[Flash]

So OK...when the flags were all erected, who was writing the laws that allowed them to erect those flags? The people who erected them.

So you retreat to this defense of your argument of "well, if it was intimidation, then it would be illegal for them to erect those flags". OK, but the same people erecting those flags were the ones who also decided the flag didn't intimidate anyone. Even though that was the reason for erecting them.

You understand how that worked, or are you going to continue with the sophistry?

Now your logic has gotten completely whacko. The law decides that intimidation is. And you have jumped from waving flags to erecting flags.

And no, a flag on a flag pole does not try to force somebody to do something which is the definition of intimidation.

Go study laws against intimidation--that is where your lack of knowledge is screwing up all your logic.

I proved all this to you once and you dropped it. I guess you forgot already.

 

[Flash]

Ah, so..OK...so then a white supremacist waving the Confederate Flag about is conveying what message?

Again, you miss the point. Conveying a message is a protected constitutional right. It can convey the message that I think you are inferior and should be my slave or returned to Africa.

It is not until you try to force that person to be your slave or return to Africa against their will it becomes intimidation.

 

[Flash]

So OK...when the flags were all erected, who was writing the laws that allowed them to erect those flags? The people who erected them.

So you retreat to this defense of your argument of "well, if it was intimidation, then it would be illegal for them to erect those flags".

You understand how that worked, or are you going to continue with the sophistry?

Stupid premise. A flag or pole cannot intimidate anyone. It requires a (threatening) action.

 

[Flash]

dude, i've seen people intimidated by a cat...........how are you going to stop that? outlaw cats or make a crime about using cats as a weapon? it has zero to do with what you're referring to

I hope they prosecuted that cat. Or, better, they should ban all cats because they might intimidate someone.

 

[LV426]

None of that overrides our constitutional rights or changes the legal requirements for intimidation which is the main point about waving a flag--not what it represents. And, I am sure I understand those elements of racism better than you.

Flash, you openly refuse to talk to anyone who has a contrary position to yours on this.

You don't personally know anyone who does, or who is a target of that flag, and you don't care to know anyone. You want to cut off debate and cut off other perspectives because they don't accommodate yours.

So you have no way of legitimately saying you understand the elements of racism when you refuse to even listen to the people who are the targets of that racism because you are a narcissist.

It sounds to me like you're scared to do the work because it might upset the conventionality to which you are steadfasting clinging.

If you learned that flag is a tool of oppression and intimidation, you couldn't really defend it along 1A lines.

It's the same realization I came to after befriending, knowing, and talking to people that flag targets. I used to have your perspective; that I couldn't understand how an inanimate object could be intimidating until I was able to listen to the people that flag targets, even realizing that as a Jew, I am also a target of that flag. So as a Jewish person, when I see that flag waved about, the impression I get is that person wants to be able to subjugate me -or worse- because of what that flag represents and how it's used as a tool to advance that representation.

You live in isolation and because of that, your world view is limited and narrowed to purely your own perspective.

So that's why it's impossible for you to fathom that flag being used as a tool of intimidation and oppression of others.

 

[LV426]

waving a damned flag isn't intimidation just like wearing a tye dyed shirt isn't intimidation

Sure it is. It was intimidation when the Klan waved it as they were lynching people, and it was intimidation when Conservatives stood outside a polling place and waved it just a couple weeks ago in Carolina.

 

[LV426]

The state makes intimidation illegal. You just refuse to understand what it involves.

YES! Right. The state does that.

Which means the state can also make intimidation legal, which is what they did when they passed all those laws and bills that established these monuments and flew the flags above state offices.

It's a two-way street Flash. If the state can make intimidation illegal, it can also make it legal. And the laws passed to preserve the Confederate monuments on state grounds do precisely that.

It is legal for them to wave a flag because the 1st Amendment protects that right.

Not if that flag is used as a tool of intimidation and oppression, which it was and still is.

They wrote the laws that said it wasn't a tool of intimidation and oppression, which is how and why they were erected.

This is the history of the flag you seem so adamant we preserve, while at the same time, utterly ignoring for the sake of your shitty argument.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Sure it is. It was intimidation when the Klan waved it as they were lynching people,

key point, the bolded part

and it was intimidation when Conservatives stood outside a polling place and waved it just a couple weeks ago in Carolina.

were they lynching people? were they actively THREATENING to lynch people? then it wasn't intimidation

 

[LV426]

Why don't you start a campaign to repeal the 1st Amendment and then we can all decide what intimidates us since you think the victim gets to decide that.

So this is a cop-out.

Instead of defending your shitty argument, you foist a task on an anonymous message board because you don't want to admit that these racists bent the law to let them intimidate people for generations with that dumb flag.

Because you don't think the flag is intimidating, no one else should...that is narcissism, you fucking stooge.

 

[TTQ64]

You are avoiding a pretty direct question here; why do those people seem to think that flag represents their views and beliefs? Because not answering that question says 1 of two things:

1) That you don't think the flag has any history, even though you've said numerous times that banning it would "erase history".

or

2) You know the flag's history but are hiding behind the 1A which doesn't protect intimidation.

So you have to be honest with yourself here, Flash, which I know is difficult for a narcissistic sociopath like you; do you really believe you don't know from where they got the idea that the flag represents their views and beliefs? Or are you lying about that?




Not important for you because you've given up on trying to see who it is important to.

White supremacist violence is important to the targeted victims of those violent acts like the Charlestown massacre, the El Paso massacre, and the Pittsburgh massacre.

Then, you dismiss those to whom it is important because you aren't personally offended or intimidated and since you lack the capacity to see anything from anyone else's perspective than your own, by telling black people they should be comfortable with that free expression simply because you are comfortable with it, and you think your comfort supersedes everyone else's.

So that's why you dismiss white supremacists; confronting the reality of their power and influence would upset the delicate and artificial BoThSiDeS balance you've negotiated for yourself on behalf of everyone else.

What a fucking joke.