Help me understand, How is the Betsy Ross flag racist?

[Sync]

Is it being used by far right extremist white nationalist (now-nazi) groups?

I'd just like to note at this point that that the far-left extremist (and somewhat violent, as the recent events in Portland demonstrate) Antifa are using tactics (if not flags/symbols) used by the Brown Shirts of Nazi Germany, but hey, let's go straight to "far right extremists are the problem".

These days, it seems, anyone can be an "extremist" if you don't agree with their views. This will have the end-result of the term "extremist" losing its meaning.

 

[BlisteredBlood]

Nike has more to lose by releasing the shoe than they gave to gain. Is the flag inherently racist? No. Is it being used by far right extremist white nationalist (now-nazi) groups? Yes. That’s the problem.

It’s not a lefty issue. It’s the issue of the climate of the country right now. It’s an issue of riots by white nationalists and now-nazi’s who would love to have a shoe like this being able to go to a HUGE brand and purchase that shoe. What is Nike telling them? In some small way they are saying, hey your views are valid. We agree with you.

And why have the Nazi’s adopted this flag because it represents a time when black people were enslaved. The golden era when they could do whatever they wanted and white ruled the land.

Of course this wouldn’t be understood if it wasn’t looked at from a person of colors point of view.

And to say that slavery wasn’t a big deal until 1860s is the biggest what the fuck?! If we are only talking about America George Washington has slaves in 1761.

Again, this wouldn’t be understood if you didn’t look at it from a colored person’s point of view.

True, but these are the same people who said that the Confederate flag was a racist symbol, considering it was a major part of history at the time. What I'm arguing is why are these people choosing this time here and now to bring it up when the situation has been done and over with for over 200 years, despite it took 100 years for the northern half of the US to see there was more profitability in industry rather than slave labor. The only reason as to why I said it wasn't that big a deal was because it was a part of history. I'm not downplaying it. And here's something else. There were black conscripts who fought in the Revolutionary War, amongst others, so... Something's not adding up here. George Washington inherited them for a time, yes, but he began to have doubts about the whole slave thing at that time, especially when the British getting set to invade.

So what did he do? He instead didn't let the colored enlist, regardless if they were free or slaves. Now we come to the Revolutionary War. What happens? He instead enlist them as conscripts anyway, because the numbers were against them, amongst a whole hoary host of other issues that were at his feet.

 

[Sync]

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. - Santayana (attributed).

Those who'd take the reins of the Political Correctness movement are risking falling into that trap. For in their drive for "equality", they are getting close to pushing the pendulum too far in the opposite direction, risking oppressing those groups the PC crowd say they want equality with.

Demanding reparations for events of 200 years ago does not drive equality; it breeds resentment from those who rightly say "I wasn't there, I wasn't involved - why do I have to pay?"

If you want equality, then obtain equality, and stop there. There are those who'd destroy rather than obtain equality, and this is where problems come from.

 

[BlisteredBlood]

Honestly I don’t have time to explain this to you from a black person’s point of view. If you don’t see the problem with the confederate flag then you won’t see the problem with the Betsy Ross flag. I’m just going to accept that and say whatever.

Okay, so what if I don't have a problem with both the Betsy Ross version of the US flag or the Confederate one? Am I supposed to ignore them and pretend they don't exist? Sorry, but the answer is no. They're part of history and so they shall remain as such. Additionally, I had time to do a little digging around to see if your statement adds up someway or somehow, but it's all pointing towards a chain of events that were otherwise set in stone, a history that's immutable and can't be defined any other way other than what was and how we've changed since then to prevent that from happening again. I'm terribly sorry especially as someone who has black blood in my family, but as an educated person as well as someone who spends time looking up and researching things, I feel no sense of racism from either of them. They're just old pieces of cloth.

 

[Sync]

Here's another things to consider:

Those who are pushing for equality and rights are doing so by demonising the values of those who came before us; they are judging people who died 200 years ago according to the sensibilities and standards of today.

Would those same people want to be similarly and negatively judged by their descendants in 200 years' time?

 

[BlisteredBlood]

Depending on the landscape of how things look in about 200 years down the road, I would hope not. Therein lies the problem, though. We won't know this as those 200 years haven't come yet and more than likely, we won't be around to see that. it would all be in the hands of the sixth, maybe seventh generation of Americans.

 

[Sync]

And that's exactly my point, BB.

200 years ago, people probably weren't wondering what their great- great- great- great- grandkids might think of them; they were more likely trying to fix problems and plan for the future according to what they knew at that time.

Similarly, the people of today should stop laying blame and finding non-existent problems all over the place; just fix the actual problems, and leave history alone.

"Judge ye not, lest ye, too, be judged."

 

[BlisteredBlood]

I'm not even gonna argue that, Sync. The Founding Fathers had a tough enough time trying to ensure that the country they left behind would become a great nation, and it still can be. It might not be the picture perfect utopia that some imagined, but think about it like this. This country has been around for over 240 years and we've made so much progress since then in terms of things like industry, agriculture, marketing, technology, medicine and other such wonderful things. But we have to remember where it is that we all come from and the strides we've made since then instead of just pointing at something and calling it racist, sexist, bigoted or whatever the newest buzzword is, because if I can counter BS with BS for a moment while I'm on this soapbox here, it's this.

History does not care one way nor the other about another person's feelings. Only with what was written into those books when those events took place all those years ago during some of the most tumultuous times in any nation's history. Seriously, you can look at any nation in the world right now and ask someone there. How did China fare during its formative years, depending on what dynasty we're talking about here. Then again, pick one. Ming, Wu, Shu, whichever. Here's another one, and let's go with Japan. How do you think the people fared during the Feudal era?

Better yet, how about Ireland, Russia, Belgium, Poland, Greece, Italy, Korea both North and South, hell, any other country you can think of. How did they do in their formative years, because let me tell you, there were lots of people who paved the way to hell with the best of intentions. Have they changed themselves for the better? Not all of them, but therein lies the central point. Every nation can better themselves. It might take time getting there, but it can happen. It takes learning from one's own history to do it.

 

[Pazzo]

We are losing focus. The discussion has devolved away from what I intended.

What anyone's ancestors may or may not have done to another's ancestors in no way makes them liable for thier actions in the distant past.

I am not looking to argue points or change peoples minds. I want to understand how the 13 star betsy ross flag became associated with rasicm. Thats all.

 

[PhoenixRising82]

We are losing focus. The discussion has devolved away from what I intended.

What anyone's ancestors may or may not have done to another's ancestors in no way makes them liable for thier actions in the distant past.

I am not looking to argue points or change peoples minds. I want to understand how the 13 star betsy ross flag became associated with rasicm. Thats all.

The way I understand it, it’s simply because it was created in a time of slavery. That’s it. Which just baffles me. Just because the first American flag was created during a time of slavery does not make it a symbol of slavery.

 

[Procyonix]

Well on the ancestor topic, I'm safe.. Mine were busy in Europe still at the time.. either oppressing or being oppressed by other people of the same race.

Based on my understanding, which I will admit is limited on this, its because some guy wrote an article about how the KKK was adopting it. I've seen moderates claim it was debunked, but I can't say I know the truth. In turn, this article was run around the Twitterverse, where it became ipso facto truth.

And as Phoenix says, there are those who associate it with that as well. While I understand their beef about the atrocities of the past, I really do. It should be pointed out, it was on the Capital in the background of President Obama's historic inauguration. I would have thought that if it was as openly racist as it is believed to be now, he would have had it removed. Whether you liked him or not, he was a history making President. He showed how far the country has come, and pointed out how far we still have to go.

And as we are entering an election cycle, outrage is necessary to stir the base.

 

[jenniferjones]

So, I may reiterate what someone else has said because I'm lazy and didn't take the time to make note of everyone's response post to this topic.

I couldn't decide whether to reply to your question or not because...I'm not exactly sure why you are asking this question. I feel like questions like these illicit opinions/emotional responses.

WHAT FOLLOWS IS MY OPINION.
1) I am not an expert. I am not speaking for a group of people. I'm not going to use your question to whine.

The Betsy Ross flag is not racist in and of itself.

• Yes, it was created during a time period where slavery (bondage of people from Africa and African descent) in what we now refer to as the AMERICAN ECONOMY.
• The issue lies in the fact that the Betsy Ross Flag and other flags have been utilized by certain groups as a VISUAL SYMBOL to represent their ideology of WHITE SUPREMACY.
• Is that the flag's fault? No.
• Does talking about colonial American history and American history, in general, bring up the issue of slavery...often times it does, because - no matter your political opinion. It's a part of our shared history and needs to be acknowledged.

Now regarding the issue with Nike, which wasn't mentioned specifically but I am assuming this relates in part to your question even if not directly mentioned in your question.

• Nike is a Brand. A Brand.
• Brands need to stick with a consistent Voice.
• Nike chose to partner with Colin Kaepernick prior to the shoe being designed and released. Kaepernick is their spokesperson.
• Since Nike partnered with Kaepernick their sales have INCREASED by a lot.
• Nike isn't stupid. When Kaepernick brought up the issue that some people may find the Betsy Ross Flag racist because...they yanked the shoes because he is there spokesperson/brand ambassador etc.
• Why? Branding consistency. I don't know what the people of Nike actually think, but it's evident their marketing team is topnotch.
• Branding and Marketing aren't about catering to the whole world. It's about catering to a group of people.
• If you are upset by their actions. THEN YOU AREN'T THE PEOPLE THEY ARE MARKETING TOWARDS. Use your dollar and don't buy their crap if you don't like their message. Nike doesn't care because they've done their research and know they have a whole other group of people who either don't care or will buy more of their crap because of this stance. That group probably outnumbers the other group - in regards to their customer base. Just their customer base...because they aren't trying to lose money.

It's really that simple.

 

[Pazzo]

So its trendy , cool, and profitable to toss around the racist card...

Please tell me we arent the result of millions of years of evolution, just to produce stuff like that...

 

[Procyonix]

Using sweatshop labor doesn't hurt their bottom line either.
I swore off their brand long before that individual came along, not because of their political messages, but for their business practices.

So yes I am not their target for marketing. What was written so concisely above is on point. While there is some debate over if the sources regarding the use of the flag by hate groups veracity, it ultimately doesn't matter. Facts and fact checking are a foreign concept in this era of click bait "news" which make money by stoking their audiences rage.

This is not meant to besmirch or otherwise claim that those who have posted as I do not claim that individuals are so cavalier with facts, but rather media companies. They make good money off of sowing hatred and mistrust, and then report on it.

It's how the big multinational corporations control the masses by division. If we are busy arguing and hating one another, they can do as they please.

That being said, I do very much understand how the shadow of centuries of slavery affects their descendents. Things like that are hard to forget. While we can quibble over details, it is something that affects millions of people.

History has important lessons for the modern world, some good some bad. But both are important to remember. Whether we like our nation's past or not, it is all a part of where we are today. No nation is perfect, not even close. But judging the past through today's morality is not of any value. As our nation evolves and changes, so do societal norms. How will history look at us centuries from now? I rather doubt it Will be any kinder than how we now view our past.

 

[jenniferjones]

Using sweatshop labor doesn't hurt their bottom line either.
I swore off their brand long before that individual came along, not because of their political messages, but for their business practices.

So yes I am not their target for marketing. What was written so concisely above is on point. While there is some debate over if the sources regarding the use of the flag by hate groups veracity, it ultimately doesn't matter. Facts and fact checking are a foreign concept in this era of click bait "news" which make money by stoking their audiences rage.

This is not meant to besmirch or otherwise claim that those who have posted as I do not claim that individuals are so cavalier with facts, but rather media companies. They make good money off of sowing hatred and mistrust, and then report on it.

It's how the big multinational corporations control the masses by division. If we are busy arguing and hating one another, they can do as they please.

That being said, I do very much understand how the shadow of centuries of slavery affects their descendents. Things like that are hard to forget. While we can quibble over details, it is something that affects millions of people.

History has important lessons for the modern world, some good some bad. But both are important to remember. Whether we like our nation's past or not, it is all a part of where we are today. No nation is perfect, not even close. But judging the past through today's morality is not of any value. As our nation evolves and changes, so do societal norms. How will history look at us centuries from now? I rather doubt it Will be any kinder than how we now view our past.

Thanks for pointing out the issue of ethical labor practices in relation to Nike.

Facts are facts, in regards to the history, present, or future.

Facts have meaning, provide context and are important to note.

The fact that people are emotional about bringing up certain historical facts is something to think ponder, and I am not talking about you specifically.

Companies, the media, *coughs* and politicians coerce the public based on the emotions and identity politics associated with certain issues - all for the same reasons basically I might add.

All anyone can do is educate themselves, be self aware and persevere on.

 

[Pazzo]

Oh. Im all about calling someone out on being racist when its a genuine thing, and they are judging another race as inferior. That I can agree with you on.

My problem is that this particular situation is someone saying something is racist just because he thinks its associated with a hate group when it isnt.

Its also possible he said that just to make a few headlines.

Catch my drift SMYLM?

 

[Procyonix]

Thanks for pointing out the issue of ethical labor practices in relation to Nike.

Facts are facts, in regards to the history, present, or future.

Facts have meaning, provide context and are important to note.

The fact that people are emotional about bringing up certain historical facts is something to think ponder, and I am not talking about you specifically.

Companies, the media, *coughs* and politicians coerce the public based on the emotions and identity politics associated with certain issues - all for the same reasons basically I might add.

All anyone can do is educate themselves, be self aware and persevere on.

Agree with you there, thanks for your earlier concise summary btw.

 

[lara'rial-za]

I'm a journalist and I've done work as a public relations for many businesses similar to Nike. So here are my 2 cents. Please remember that these are not my emotional opinions and just addressed the facts as quickly as I can on each post.

1. Yes, the betty ross flag is now being used by SOME alt-right extremist groups but it's a very small number of people. For the majority of us, it would have no impact on us since those groups only target their anger and aggression on minorites that live near them. Odds are if you don't live in the deep south/northwest coast area, you won't ever run into one of these groups. Before this shoe, majority of us didn't even know that was happening which is why it's a surprise for all of us. The groups that are using the betty ross flag as their symbol want political parties to cater to their ideas of stripping away rights for women and colored people. They believe that America should shut down immigration entry for anyone who is not of european decent and revert the laws on interracial marriage. Oh, they also blame economic struggles of america on asian and jewish migrants. I can't remember the name but It's almost as if a german political party did something similar to this once.

Obviously no political party takes them seriously, and all 50 states won't even let them register because they need a certain amount of voters to agree with them.

2.

From what I've read, Nike withdrew the shoes because one man - Colin Kaepernick - complained (allegedly on behalf of others). There was no widespread complaint about the shoe, as far as I'm aware. So Nike has essentially pulled a product from sale because of the complaint of one person.

Understandably, there is growing dissatisfaction against Nike because of it.

Supposedly, the 13-star flag is related to an era of slavery in US history.

Yes, Colin Kaepernick, is the only one who complained...Internally...about this shoe. As Jennifer Jones, pointed out so directly, he's a brand ambassador of Nike, his voice matters. Since his partnership with Nike, he has helped bring in $2.7 Billion. If someone was working for your company and helped you bring in that much money, do you think you would listen to their voice? And since cancelling the shoe, they have only brought in more money.

So many republicans and conservatives complained about this before July 4th, only to have a twitter page currently reposting videos of those conservatives going to bbq or out shopping in their nikes. One popular conservative broadcaster even talks about how he loves the comforting feel of nike shoes, a week after he said he would revolt against the company. Most people who say they're upset with nike only said this to look confident for their viewers and voters.

Governor Doug Doucey of Arizona said he would take away Nike's tax break in Arizona, and then two days later he attended a nike sponored party in Phoenix and talked about how great it was for nike to start a new factory in Arizona and congratulated himself for doubling their tax break.

For the conservatives, going against big companies is a losing battle for them, so it's just a pony show for their supporters. That's what capitalism gets you. When you rely on solely companies to expand business and create jobs, the republicans have to cater to big businesses and make sure they don't leave their state for another. I'm sure if Nike's tax break was cut they would reconsider moving their factory in Arizona.

Like procynoix said, we are entering an election cycle, outrage is necessary to stir the base.

For BlisteredBlood and anyone who thinks slavery was only an issue in 1860s

3. The history can be a little hard to see since majority of us are not black people. Slavery was not just an issue for 1860s. In fact, US tried to end slavery multiple times, dating back to as early as 1793 in congress. However, they lost the votes in congress because southern states would not vote for it. In 1808, the US finally passed a bill that would stop the Atlantic Slave trade routes to America, which is why slave owners started to breed their slaves at a rapid pace for the labor demand. The southern states votes yes for this because they realized that they would make a lot of money by "growing" their own slaves instead of paying slave ships to bring them from Africa. The slaveholders gave every black female a quota to give birth to 3 to 4 children. Little did white slave owners know, this would be the cause of their doom.

Slave owners could sell these kids when they reached an age to work on the cotton plantations. This became a big issue in 1820s because blacks were outnumbering the number of white people living on plantations. With black people out numbering white slave holders in the south, many africans thought they could revolt in numbers. Some were successful, others were just bloody. What stoked the embers was Nat Turner's revolt in Virginia, August 1831. He led 75 blacks against 60 white slaveholders and they killed their white slave holders. They tried to head north, but the state militia gunned them down (Turner himself was arrested and hanged). Turner's Rebellion was the start of true cold actions of civil war. Southern Democrats state politicians blamed it on the education they received and passed a law that would limit the education slaves could receive. While the northern Republicans started a movement to end slavery in general. This issue led to Fredrick Douglass and William Lloyd Garrison to start a newspaper that would report far more details on slavery than most newspapers were allowed to and write editorials on why slavery is bad. The turner's rebellion also led to Harriet Beecher Stowe publish the iconic bestselling, Uncle Tom's Cabin, an anti-slavery novel.

Uncle Tom's Cabin was one the biggest impacts on the Northern States and Abraham Lincoln's life. He credited that the war started because of her book, and his family later credited the book as the defining reason why he wanted to become the president.

For BlisteredBlood & Sync

The issue with American politics is that just because you had a life without issues in your backyard doesn't mean everyone living in your county is similar.

- I agree that there are extremists on both end of the spectrum and antifa is definitely the mirror image of alt-right movements.
- The confederate flag for years has stoked a racist connotation to the general public. We are one of the only country in the world where we let the losing party of a bloody war to waive their flag in pride. And this flag over the years has been a symbol of hate. If you can't see that, then you have some serious soul searching to do.
- you shouldn't forget the confederate flag, you have to remember the history and the fact that they lost, therefore, no one should have the right to waive the flag on american soil. That is what a true patriot is.
- If you think the problems were solved just because the union won the civil war, you should read up on american history and american politics and why they needed to have a civil rights movement.
- I grew up in the deep south so even as a white person I knew the harsh reality of things. My high school prom was segregated....which was in 2004. The federal gov.t forced my town to desegregate in 2011 by threatening the state to take away their funding. Currently, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi and a few other states are the only ones to have segregated schools and prom.
- The reparations are not for slavery, you should do your research on what the reparations are for if you're going to go of topic and bring it up. Start with this and do your research on land stolen from African Americans after civil war. Their Family Bought Land One Generation After Slavery. The Reels Brothers Spent Eight Years in Jail for Refusing to Leave It.
- Philosophically, you have every right to judge a person's action no matter what time period they're from. What the society views them as is up for the majority. A 100 years from now, the majority demographics of america will be asians and hispanics, who knows how they will perceive this time period.

For Procynoix

5. I disagree with you on your view of journalism, I would say your opinion is correct on broadcast journalism, but it's not correct on print journalism. However, some would say I'm biased simply because I'm a journalist who worked for major journalism companies. We can discuss more in detail about the perils of journalism, but that would certainly take a conversation that would last days. One opinion I would say I have currently is the conservative ideologies are currently under a microscope and under attack by society so they have the largest to gain from having people distrust the news.

 

[Bardic Amory]

The Betsy Ross flag is also just the latest of these flags to be claimed in this way. The Gadsden Flag also has a history of being appropriated that way.

The Tea Party's rise at the start of the decade ushered in a new wave of popularity for that flag, though it's waxed and wand with greater furor than the Betsy Ross flag, from my understanding. In 2016, The New Yorker published a nice summary of that flag's fraught history from Revolutionary sentiment to a variety of generally right-wing causes in the present.

 

[lara'rial-za]

The Betsy Ross flag is also just the latest of these flags to be claimed in this way. The Gadsden Flag also has a history of being appropriated that way.

The Tea Party's rise at the start of the decade ushered in a new wave of popularity for that flag, though it's waxed and wand with greater furor than the Betsy Ross flag, from my understanding. In 2016, The New Yorker published a nice summary of that flag's fraught history from Revolutionary sentiment to a variety of generally right-wing causes in the present.

It's a shame the Gadsden Flag is being misappropriated by small factions of people to spread their hate. It's by far my favorite American flag. I have read the article before and one key note made in the subtext is how the Nazi took the swastika and turned into a symbol of hate, while till this day in Hinduism and Buddhism.

 

[Procyonix]

Hatred is not a left/right thing. There is enough blame for everyone to go around. Anyone who wants to understand much of this stuff need only study history. Racism, and most every other ism you care to name, traditionally is used for political gain and appropriation of power.

When I was young, Fahrenheit 451, 1984 and other such dystopian future night mares were meant as a warning to the future. Instead, we took it and made it into a blue print for the modern world. You will conform "or else."

What nobody seems to understand in the modern world is that the three big ideologies that end in -ist are all related to one another and all three have their roots in one man: Karl Marx. And this is not to say it was his intention. Whether or not you agree with his philosophy or not, he wished to improve the life of the common man, as he saw it. But then Lenin took over Socialism and created Communism. Then Mussolini took it to Italy, and named it Fascism. Where a lunatic took it to an extreme and ruined more than just a thousands of year old symbol of peace. But because of how the war ended and the propaganda machine created by the Cold War, All the isms were made bad. And Since on the surface, Fascism is different from the other two, it was labeled "right wing." However, the actual concepts of all three are the same: Centralization of economic power though government control of everything. Each requires struggle among the population, to keep their minds off of what the government is doing. Be it class based as in Socialism, and theoretically Communism, or based on hatred of a community of people for their religious beliefs as Germany took it in the 40s. But at their core, they are one and the same.

The world we live in today is directly linkable to this, as when Germany betrayed their ally Russia, the war turned. And as Roosevelt and Churchill needed Stalin, his atrocities were swept under the rug. And after when they turned on us and we on them, the Cold war and its silly games created the hatred in the world in the Middle East, SE Asia, and Central America. Places the two super powers used them as pawns in a global game of chess with real lives. Which brings us to the terrorism and crumbling of Central America and large parts of South America.

Companies like CNN, The Washington Post, Vox, Buzzfeed, and a slew of others have taken victimhood and turned it and outrage into a business model to keep their dying industry alive. And we, as the people who consume this stuff, allow ourselves to be swayed by activists pretending to be journalists and historians, and even scientists. This is not to say that ALL journalists, historians and scientists fall into this category of charletain. There are a lot of really good people in those three fields who do good work. But their reputation as a profession is smeared and marred by what so many consider news today.

It is no longer about objective news coverage. But rather how many clicks can we get before this bs story we made up has to be retracted. That is assuming they are willing to retract rather than double down. When I was a younger man, CNN was trusted. It was known as the World Wide Leader In News. It hasn't been that in at least a decade. There are those who would argue longer, but I give them the benefit of the doubt. I took a lot of courses in my younger days in journalism and even freelanced in sports reporting for about six years. The days of the practices of proper journalism have been followed by the industry at large. When you had to fact check a story to publish it. When you had to back up something with three separate independent sources to claim a thing as a fact.

To answer your original point to me about journalism, lara'rial-za, I put my faith in local media, as they have to live in the places they serve. Face the people they write about. They can't go on twitter and burn the house down somewhere else with no consequences. And there are some national journalists I trust. Generally speaking, the liberals labeled as "Alt-right" are the best sources of news. Words are power. And in an election year, where one side has nothing to offer except hatred for the other side, it will only get worse. I hope, that at some point. Somebody rational will emerge to pull our collective heads out of our collective asses.

And while I am sure to most of you, I sound like I'm some alt-right person, I am actually what is left of a 90s liberal. Which by today's far left veer by the party just looks conservative by comparison. I am very big on human rights, all humans, not just select few. I believe in Equality not forced equity. Justice over revenge. And most importantly, Freedom of Speech. It's the first amendment of the Constitution for a reason. It is the only way civil dialogue can be had over problems facing our society and nation. That means we have to allow people who say bad things to talk. because once you say this group or that group can't speak because they are hateful, or are saying something I don't want to hear, you are now the arbiter of peoples rights as outlined by the laws of the country. And then the victim becomes the oppressor. Which in most instances, I don't think people actually wish to be that.

Anyways, my two cents worth adjusted for inflation. Take it or leave it at your leisure. I am sure I will offend somebody along the way here. Not my intent, but in today;s world, "offended" is the natural state of being for much of the country (both sides again).

 

[Bardic Amory]

You're right that Mussolini is often credited as the father of fascism sometime between 1915 and 1921 (so called because of the Roman fasces symbol bringing together the sticks of the people into a strong bundle guarded by the ax). However, fascism's nationalistic emphasis stood in opposition to the views of socialists and communists. Mussolini also left the Italian socialists in 1914 and burned their offices when acceding to power. Fascism also wedded state and corporate power, as opposed to communism's desire to abolish it.

Unfortunately, your history of communism and socialism is also incorrect. With Frederick Engels, Karl Marx published The Communist Manifesto (or the Manifesto of the Communist Party) in 1848. Thus, they were the original Communists. Communism is also a fairly well-defined political movement; in contrast, socialism is an ill-defined and multi-faceted construct. However, Henri de Saint-Simon was one of its most prominent intellectual forebearers from the turn of the 19th century throughout his letters.

It's also telling that your list of polarizing media includes sources that skew left but omits those on the right with equal if not more egregious bias and untrustworthiness. Fox News, The Wall Street Journal, Newsmax, Breitbart, and many others weaponize conservative victimhood to malignant effect. They play to the alienation and fears of that particular base, and they increasingly serve as arms of an increasingly rigid and dogmatic party.

I agree that local media are generally good sources of information when their voices are not being channeled to feed their owners' narratives. However, I would argue that both sides host elements that have nothing but hatred for the other side, as negative partisanship is on the rise. Indeed, both sides have become increasingly intolerant of hearing each other's perspectives.

 

[Procyonix]

While I get why you feel my list of sources is "telling" there is a reason it is as it is, and why those you mentioned are not included. I don't accept Breitbard as a legitimate news source. I consider it strictly opinion and poor ones at that. I don't read the WSJ, as it has nothing to value me as I am not a rich man. And the other one I've never even heard of.

Ironically, as much ad I grew up calling Fox News Faux news, and they do have an openly right wing position it is true, they have gotten most of the major stories of 2019 thus far right, more than the others combined from what i can tell. And Again, I take them with a hefty grain of salt. But I do agree, I should have included them, it was an oversight.

The other sources I listed make no attempt to get it right. They will publish anything that will offend their base, true or not to get clicks. They are all dying as businesses laying people off left and right. Which only makes them more desperate.

As to the history issues, I had forgotten the Manifesto, to be honest. It's late and sometimes I put things in the wrong order when tired. My experience with communism is personal. As my family came to the states to flee communism. I have lost at least three members of my immediate family in Gulags. My family got letters from family that had more holes than swiss cheese cut into it from Soviet Censorship.

I wont claim or pretend to claim that I am perfect. But if somebody wants reasoned discussion or debate, I am willing to do so. And while I am not familiar with your sources and their ability to be impartial, I will until proven otherwise, give them the benefit of the doubt. I don't have a party any longer. The right finds me too liberal, and the Dems left me long time ago when they started down this new road to the cliff off to the left. But to say so publicly is akin to societal suicide. But regardless, I thank you for the concise and reasoned response. Whether we agree or not, it doesn't matter. that you are civil and respectful does. And it is appreciated. Its very uncommon in today's world.

 

[Vekseid]

Procyonix, it takes a pretty serious logical blunder to associate fascism - especially as Mussolini put it - with socialism. Not even the Nazis practiced 'state capitalism' except as an absolute last resort when no private industry wanted to touch it. They were anti-private business in only one regard - the businesses of Jews.

Anyway, for my opinion on the topic at hand...

I fully supported kneeling for the anthem. Everyone opposed to it is a flat-out bigot. I don't always agree with who the black community rallies around - but I've learned how people behave in large groups, what sets things off visibly is always somewhat disconnected from the proper issues at hand.

Calling the Betsy Ross flag racist is up there on the 'left wing' bullshit-o-meter. Somewhere below cishate and above lecturing people for choosing overly gendered 3rd-gender pronouns for themselves. I think our flag has way too many stars, thirteen is a nice sexy number.

I see it less as left wing and more as trying to remain relevant, clinging at whatever complaint they can find so they can stay in the news.

 

[lara'rial-za]

It's a shame the Gadsden Flag is being misappropriated by small factions of people to spread their hate. It's by far my favorite American flag. I have read the article before and one key note made in the subtext is how the Nazi took the swastika and turned into a symbol of hate, while till this day in Hinduism and Buddhism.

I guess my whole post didn't survive. I was hitting delete really fast and deleted too much lol. "while till this day in Hinduism and Buddhism it stands as a symbol of peace."

I would disagree with many of your historical statements Procyonix, aside from communism, none of isms, have a direct correlation to Karl Marx. Most of us view social security, medicare, gov.t welfare, and other social welfare as socialism. Roosevelt passed many socialist programs like social security a little over 10 years before Karl Marx became relevant. Roosevelt started writing those bills even before that. American and European and asian history would show that most isms are far predated than his work was published. Things like eminent domain, land preservation and other equal opportunity laws is what attracted my family to come to the US. These things are very much anti-capitalism and more socialist in nature.

Of your list of news papers, I would implore you to rethink about Vox. I think their articles certainly only cater to democratic readers but their information is accurate and not cherry picked to fit their agenda. I agree with you on Buzzfeed and WP.

I don't think Fox News gets it's information accurately, and they certainly bend the truth to fit their narrative. I believe for 2019, as of right now, they're facing the most lawsuits for incorrect information. For 2018, it was Washington Post, largely due to their mishandling of the stand of between a Kentucky highschooler and a native american in Washington D.C.

Most people forget that journalism industries can be sued for libel, defamation and incorrect information. On more occasions than before it has been Fox and they settle out of court so it's not so relevant. The Murdochs are rich enough to do so.