Theater bans Gone With The Wind for being "Insensitive"

[Noctis]

Just now, Cmasterclay said:

Right, I think we're doomed to repeat the past regardless, my friend, but we should be taking efforts to at least try to mitigate that. My family is from the South. They don't consider this a failed war. They consider this a "lost cause." That's dangerous. 

 

Yep, and the Bible and Quaran have also led to millions of charities and spiritual organizations that have helped tons of people. Some of my friends who I know were in the Christian Varsity organization at GW are flying to Houston right now. Religion and political ideology are whole different ballgames. 

 

Also, I can give a shit about Islam, I barely give a shit about my own religion - I wasn't even bar mitzvahed. I care about the outright oppression of Muslims and Jews in the United States and the equal right to follow non-violent traditions and worship.

 

Religion and politics are incredibly interconnected, especially when it comes to Christianity and Islam (particularly the latter). The vast majority do these charities in order to try and convert people to their religion. Look at the societal destruction in many parts of Africa because of Christian and Muslim missionaries where they'd rather shove their religious books down their throats instead of properly giving them food, water, aid, and a proper education. 

 

 

[Noctis]

1 minute ago, Cmasterclay said:

Maybe it was an exaggeration, but it's a hell of a lot more than say...20%. It's a scary number. 

 

 

 

Can you give me numbers? Polls from objective sources? 

[WrathOfHan]

[Goffe]

20 minutes ago, Cmasterclay said:

My mom works for the library, and her department refuses to lend out shit like Mein Kampf and Protocols of the Elders of Zion without a clear written reason from a school or historical society. Rightfully so, too. They aren't just words when they're open celebrations of an ideology that led to the murder of millions. We have to be able to contextualize a difference between book burnings of "degenerate Jewish authors" and not having people wildly whooping in applause in celebration of the Confederacy.. They aren't the same. This zero-sum Reddit ideology regarding free speech gotta go. It's a debate with nuance. 

Scary stuff to hear from someone as intelligent as you. And why shut down any potential argument by classifying it as a "reddit ideology"? Shameful.

[Spidey Freak]

12 minutes ago, Noctis said:

I don't disagree with this, but it's a little worrisome how many things people are calling to get banned on such a massive scale in the West. 

I don't think most people want it to be completely banned, just highlighting the necessity to always contextualize it. I'd actually prefer if Disney did the same for Song of the South instead of their current approach towards it i.e. pretending it never existed. 

[JB33]

9 minutes ago, damnitgeorge08 said:

Love you cmasterclay and grey ghost. JB33, I understand your fear but you just need to have one look at what germany did. They banned nazi symbols, salutes, and books glorifying it. But they didn't remove it from education. They are thought about that history without anything glorifying it in their country. 

America has always been criticised for not taking serious steps against confederacy symbols from inside and outside alike. A child learns that civil war was bad and bad people lost. But then he gets outside and see confederacy flags getting waved. Charlotsville was a wake up call, that glorifying this symbols had serious effects. Ofcourse more and more people will join the cause.

I see the point, and I concede that removing the confederate flags and statues has virtue. As I said, it's more the sheep culture amonf the left that annoys me. I have absolutely nothing against NOT glorifying defenders of slavery and oppression. It's when it snowballs and goes too far that annoys me, and scares me.

Edited August 27, 2017 by JB33

[Cmasterclay]

2 minutes ago, Noctis said:

 

Can you give me numbers? Polls from objective sources? 

Nope, this is a strawman argument from both of us, frankly. I shouldn't have threw out any numbers. But here's what I'll say: I'm not from Jordan, or from Canada, no offense. I'm from the South. My dad was raised in a shack in East Texas. I live in Miami now, but I grew up with family in Central Florida and the foothills of North Carolina. I know the South enough to say that alot more than 2% of the South thinks of the Confederacy as a great lost cause of a glory age that must be brought back. Just because a largely black district in New Orleans voted against David Duke one time doesn't mean that the South still isn't a hotbed of open racism and institutional violence. 

[Cmasterclay]

2 minutes ago, Goffe said:

Scary stuff to hear from someone as intelligent as you. And why shut down any potential argument by classifying it as a "reddit ideology"? Shameful.

Which part was scary? The fact that frothing anti-Semities can't order Mein Kampt from a publically funded institution in the largest Jewish county in America? By nuance to free speech, I meant that public funds and private business shouldn't become a platform for open celebration of bigotry. I obviously do not believe in government led suppression or arrest of anyone, if that's what you think. 

[Chaz]

2 minutes ago, Cmasterclay said:

Nope, this is a strawman argument from both of us, frankly. I shouldn't have threw out any numbers. But here's what I'll say: I'm not from Jordan, or from Canada, no offense. I'm from the South. My dad was raised in a shack in East Texas. I live in Miami now, but I grew up with family in Central Florida and the foothills of North Carolina. I know the South enough to say that alot more than 2% of the South thinks of the Confederacy as a great lost cause of a glory age that must be brought back. Just because a largely black district in New Orleans voted against David Duke one time doesn't mean that the South still isn't a hotbed of open racism and institutional violence. 

David Duke ran in Southwest Louisiana. You honestly don't have a clue what you're talking about. 

[WrathOfHan]

I think saying 50% of the South would vote to bring slavery back is a bit of an exaggeration, but that percentage is probably in double digits.

[Chaz]

2 minutes ago, WrathOfHan said:

I think saying 50% of the South would vote to bring slavery back is a bit of an exaggeration, but that percentage is probably in double digits.

This is the modern Left. They have no basis for their fantasies.

[CoolioD1]

people on both sides are already totally ok with modern day slavery

[Noctis]

6 minutes ago, Cmasterclay said:

Nope, this is a strawman argument from both of us, frankly. I shouldn't have threw out any numbers. But here's what I'll say: I'm not from Jordan, or from Canada, no offense. I'm from the South. My dad was raised in a shack in East Texas. I live in Miami now, but I grew up with family in Central Florida and the foothills of North Carolina. I know the South enough to say that alot more than 2% of the South thinks of the Confederacy as a great lost cause of a glory age that must be brought back. Just because a largely black district in New Orleans voted against David Duke one time doesn't mean that the South still isn't a hotbed of open racism and institutional violence. 

 

From both of us? Exactly what have I said that is considered strawman? I have not thrown random statistics out of my ass to try and prove my point. And I'm not from Jordan, either. And yes...I'm sure that there are a lot more than 2% that consider the Confederacy as something great that's been lost. But it's been blindingly obvious that the more the older generation dies away, the less common it is.

[grey ghost]

8 minutes ago, Noctis said:

Yes, this is what bothers me, too. I'm not American but I follow American politics and society very closely and there is no reason to believe that over 50% of them would vote for the return of slavery. That is just beyond absurd. 

 

Talk about a fucking hyperbole and then ask yourselves why the left has gone off the deep end. And no...the left should not dare call themselves liberals. They have become anything but.

 

Oh please, certain schools are trying to erase evolution, sex education, and slavery from school books.

 

The evil liberals just want kids to know science is good and bigotry is bad.

 

I don't believe in hate speech laws but bigotry should at least remain taboo.

 

Celebrating pro-slavery leaders is inexcusable. If you want sell a million books celebrating the confederacy, knock yourself out. But we don't need to celebrate those things as a society with monuments and statues.

[Emerald kikyou]

6 minutes ago, Noctis said:

 

Religion and politics are incredibly interconnected, especially when it comes to Christianity and Islam (particularly the latter). The vast majority do these charities in order to try and convert people to their religion. Look at the societal destruction in many parts of Africa because of Christian and Muslim missionaries where they'd rather shove their religious books down their throats instead of properly giving them food, water, aid, and a proper education. 

 

 

 

There are two sides to everything. Not all charities have agendas. Sadly , religion has always been used by politicians to achieve hidden agendas. It's never the other way around. Religion and politics are only interconnected when the so called " believer " uses it to achieve his ambitions, which is rarely if ever about the belief/religion itself. It's always about power and control. They twist the religion to fit what they want and uses it as an easy medium to control masses.

[WrathOfHan]

Just now, Chaz said:

This is the modern Left. They have no basis for their fantasies.

I live in a conservative part of Florida and see several confederate flags each week on the road. Hell, there's an apartment complex hanging a confederate flag on a window before my neighborhood.

[Cmasterclay]

2 minutes ago, Chaz said:

David Duke ran in Southwest Louisiana. You honestly don't have a clue what you're talking about. 

It's been redistricted since then. Also, David Duke ran in multiple elections. He made it to the runoff in the 1992 Senate race. He finished with 38.5 % of the vote. He said after the election he won with his constituency of white voters, and the exit polls confirmed that. This argument is pointless when there's an entire other race with wayyy more voters and evidence. He also actually fucking served in the Louisiana House for three years! Jesus Christ, what a dumb argument. 

[Chaz]

1 minute ago, Cmasterclay said:

It's been redistricted since then. Also, David Duke ran in multiple elections. He made it to the runoff in the 1992 Senate race. He finished with 38.5 % of the vote. He said after the election he won with his constituency of white voters, and the exit polls confirmed that. This argument is pointless when there's an entire other race with wayyy more voters and evidence. He also actually fucking served in the Louisiana House for three years! Jesus Christ, what a dumb argument. 

Yeah, in 1992. Where is he now?

 

Tell me more about how half of all southern white people want to enslave black people. Much better argument.

Edited August 27, 2017 by Chaz

[Noctis]

Just now, Emerald kikyou said:

 

There are two sides to everything. Not all charities have agendas. Sadly , religion has always been used by politicians to achieve hidden agendas. It's never the other way around. Religion and politics are only interconnected when the so called " believer " uses it to achieve his ambitions, which is rarely if ever about the belief/religion itself. It's always about power and control. They twist the religion to fit what they want and uses it as an easy medium to control masses.

And what exactly is religion without power? To assume that religious people trying to gain power has nothing to do with the religion itself is foolhardy to the extreme and turning a blind eye to reality. Just read Christian and Islamic history. Islam as a religion is inherently more political, though. It's just in its nature with its verses. 

[Noctis]

1 minute ago, Cmasterclay said:

It's been redistricted since then. Also, David Duke ran in multiple elections. He made it to the runoff in the 1992 Senate race. He finished with 38.5 % of the vote. He said after the election he won with his constituency of white voters, and the exit polls confirmed that. This argument is pointless when there's an entire other race with wayyy more voters and evidence. He also actually fucking served in the Louisiana House for three years! Jesus Christ, what a dumb argument. 

To be fair, 1992 is almost three decades ago. A LOT has changed.