| CURRENT EVENTS Following Provorov's stance on Flyer's "Pride Night," NY Rangers "ditch LBGTQ+ jerseys."

musso

Century Club
Sorry, I don't remember any of the LGBT's ARMY, NAVY, AF, MARINES fighting/dying in wars to ensure America's level of freedom. Don't see the analogous comparison.
Many people don't believe the military protects our freedom, and many don't believe law enforcement serves and protects the people. Many believe instead that these intitutions have mutated into self-protecting, self-perpetuating enterprises. Interestingly our Founders didn't even want a "standing army" and remarked often at how the British Navy only looted and abused the British people on behalf of mercantilist traders who coveted foreign raw materials and export markets for British goods.

The comparison I drew was how the Right now supports a professional athlete peacefully declining to participate in league-sponsored ceremonial support of a cultural ideal. However the Right was quick to deride NFL players who also felt inclined to peacefully not participate in league-sponsored ceremonies.
 

It Takes Eleven

Quoth the Raven...
Scholarship Club
Many people don't believe the military protects our freedom, and many don't believe law enforcement serves and protects the people. Many believe instead that these intitutions have mutated into self-protecting, self-perpetuating enterprises.

This is written like a journalist who wants to express an opinion under the guise of "some people believe..."

What do you believe?
 

musso

Century Club
I believe the backlash was to players refusing to support the national anthem - with or without a flyover or any other involvement of the military. Flyovers don't make sense for basketball games or football games in domed stadiums.
The Dept of Defense began giving millions to the NFL to put on extravagant displays of patriotism and additional ceremonies here and there. This goes above and beyond aircraft fly-overs. As a side note, players traditionally remained in their lockerrooms for the national anthem, but after 9/11 the NFL (probably at the behest of the Bush Admin) brought the players out for the anthem for propagandistic effects. They wanted fans to see their beloved players showing reverence to the flag, and for viewers at home the camera zooming in on the emotional faces of their football heroes was an effective tactic to elicit popular support for the War on Terror. The Bush Admin exploited NFL games as a kind of civic church gathering (statistically the largest gathering in the country, both in attendance and watching on TV) to use emotion and pageantry to trick voters into conflating support for veterans as support for a war or foreign policy objective. The players who refused to stand for the anthem saw worship of the flag as a way of showing support for, as they saw it, a system of injustice at home and abroad.
 
Last edited:

musso

Century Club
This is written like a journalist who wants to express an opinion under the guise of "some people believe..."

What do you believe?
I believe outcomes (or effects) matter more than intentions (or stated goals). Our Founders were more informed on history than most Americans are today. And they understood better than most people today how professional soldiers inevitablly create the insecurity they are commissioned to guard against. In fact, their existence (and the tax revenue they require) requires a little insecurity every now and then. This is particularly true of the contractors who over time rely on perpetual renewal of government contracts to remain viable. Here are other examples of intentions not matching with outcomes:

Tree-hugging liberals intended to preserve and protect defenseless nature and vulnerable animals despite the empirical evidence demonstrating that private land ownership and stewardship is far superior to government land management. Liberals intended to uplift the poor with welfare schemes, but in doing so they incentivized women leaving their husbands. And since single parent homes are always poorer off, the poverty rate only increased.

Law-and-order conservatives intended to protect families from the harmful effects of drugs but in doing so broke apart families by incarcerating minority fathers at unprecedented rates. In doing so they killed the future job prospects of minority men, leading to high recidivism, and the largest prison population on the planet right here in "the land of the free." Conservatives intended to decrease anti-Americanism by bombing, invading, and occupying foreign lands, but it turns out it was US imperialism that fueled the anti-imperial, anti-Americanism in the first place.

I believe good and naive people enter into bad organizations all the time for the best of reasons. Others take whatever jobs they can find because they are desperate. But the intentions of the participants in any system will always be mitigated by the structure, operating principles, and incentives of the organization. Hierarchical organizations, particularly in the public sector, often cannot help but do bad things and do them poorly. And the fact that some good does result from these organizations is mostly because good people go rogue sometimes and don't follow organizational protocol.
 
Last edited:

OldPlayer

Crimson Tide Club
The Dept of Defense began giving millions to the NFL to put on extravagant displays of patriotism and additional ceremonies here and there. This goes above and beyond aircraft fly-overs. As a side note, players traditionally remained in their lockerrooms for the national anthem, but after 9/11 the NFL (probably at the behest of the Bush Admin) brought the players out for the anthem for propagandistic effects. They wanted fans to see their beloved players showing reverence to the flag, and for viewers at home the camera zooming in on the emotional faces of their football heroes was an effective tactic to elicit popular support for the War on Terror. The Bush Admin exploited NFL games as a kind of civic church gathering (statistically the largest gathering in the country, both in attendance and watching on TV) to use emotion and pageantry to trick voters into conflating support for veterans as support for a war or foreign policy objective. The players who refused to stand for the anthem saw worship of the flag as a way of showing support for, as they saw it, a system of injustice at home and abroad.
So, it sounds as if you're not a fan of playing and standing for the national anthem.
 

musso

Century Club
So, it sounds as if you're not a fan of playing and standing for the national anthem.
No, not necessarily. I've learned that rituals (hymns) and symbols (flags) mean different things to different people. I've just learned to empathize with others' point of view. Most white, middle to upper class people identify the flag and the anthem with justice because it's helps them feel better about their comfortable station in life. On the other hand, disadvantaged people can identify the flag and anthem with the injustices that have coexisted and lingered in society which may have hurt them, others close to them, or their race more broadly.

But I can say that any government that sponsors rituals and symbols at non-political events, like sporting events, is suspect. This is a government that injects itself into the private affairs of its citizens demanding attention and worship when citizens are clearly trying to escape real life for a few hours.
 

BamaFan334

Scholarship Club
They’re not looking for you or anybody else to “celebrate”

Meh, I think you're wrong there with the way they display it all over the place and force it in your face and to accept it. And if you don't accept it you're labeled a problem, a hater, harmful to them, and anything else they can do to hurt you back. The fact they're displaying it on Nickelodeon now and putting it in the minds of young children, yeah they are looking to make everyone celebrate and accept it.
 

Crimson&WhiteGecko

Century Club
100% the point. You are only for free speech for this to like l agree with. Which was my point. And you admit it so there is no need for us to discuss this further.

I think both sides of the pendulum swing feel strongly that way. The rest of us may not agree or like another perspective but we are able to acknowledge, that this country allows all methods of free speech. I say, that I wholeheartedly disprove of kneeling during the anthem, & I may take steps to alienate (withhold funds, etc) or reduce the impact of that expression (engage in clear debate). But I will not take steps to have that perspective silenced.

The virtue of freedom of speech is built on the belief that THE Truth withstands constant scrutiny & in time ignorant philosophies wither against it. Sooo, if I have a belief about something strongly that I believe is THE Truth, then I should welcome discourse, disagreement, & scrutiny because those things should challenge my belief & if proven wrong, I am therefore persuaded. However, if not proven wrong/invalid then others should be too... but clearly doesn't happen as much as it should. As such, the founding fathers, philosophically understood a government that wishes to maintain this virtue, must therefore, allow open expression to be maintained.
 

ElephantStomp

Bama Club
Meh, I think you're wrong there with the way they display it all over the place and force it in your face and to accept it. And if you don't accept it you're labeled a problem, a hater, harmful to them, and anything else they can do to hurt you back. The fact they're displaying it on Nickelodeon now and putting it in the minds of young children, yeah they are looking to make everyone celebrate and accept it.
Everyone should accept it as long as it doesn’t affect your life any. A few rainbows and that doesn’t affect anybody no more than all the Trump 2024 stuff (I only bring him up because where I live that’s all you see)
 

musso

Century Club
Many people don't believe the military protects our freedom, and many don't believe law enforcement serves and protects the people. Many believe instead that these institutions have mutated into self-protecting, self-perpetuating enterprises. Interestingly our Founders didn't even want a "standing army" and remarked often at how the British Navy only looted and abused the British people on behalf of mercantilist traders who coveted foreign raw materials and export markets for British goods.
This is written like a journalist who wants to express an opinion under the guise of "some people believe..."

What do you believe?
I believe outcomes (or effects) matter more than intentions (or stated goals). Our Founders were more informed on history than most Americans are today. And they understood better than most people today how professional soldiers inevitablly create the insecurity they are commissioned to guard against. In fact, their existence (and the tax revenue they require) requires a little insecurity every now and then. This is particularly true of the contractors who over time rely on perpetual renewal of government contracts to remain viable.
I believe ... the fog of war occasionally recedes and sunshine can provide clarity:



In case his english isn't able to be understood at the beginning, Zelensky states, "It is obvious that American business can become the locomotive that will once again push forward global economic growth ..."
 
Top Bottom