Seems complicated. When I went to Grand Rapids Community College I was similarly told not to wear a burned up American flag as a cape, but once I contacted the ACLU the university backed away from the issue. There was a student who tore it off my jacket and ran off with it, but I replaced it with another. Also, when I was at MSU I put up a Nazi flag which my roommate didn't like too much. We compromised by covering most of it with fabric, but it was still clear to most what it was. Also, while in Grand Rapids I shaved my head bald and drew a Nazi symbol on my forehead. And in Nashville I wore a Confederate hat from time to time---sometimes while wearing pretty dresses.
In each case I had different reasons. I suppose intentions do matter. The young man in the article seemed more articulate than most kids his age, and thus what he is doing seems smarter and more informed than 95% of kids who wear name brands for the most superficial of reasons: mass conformity. If anything, the majority of these kids more closely resemble racist, narrow-minded behavior than the guy in the article. I'm not saying his reasons were perfect, but he certainly seems more thoughtful about his life than the vast majority. And given an opportunity to have conversation either with him or most bourgeois, apathetic, one-dimensional kids which populate this country of ours, I'd much rather spend my time with him.
Zef wore a cape. Ha ha!
If I'd been your roommate and you hung up a swastika, I would have assumed it was your way of asking to have your face smashed in. We had neo-nazis around my school - not attending, just looking for weirdos to beat up. Some of my friends got hurt pretty badly.
isn't he just someone looking for attention and trying to provoke as thrasher says? he doesn't necessarily seem above-average intelligent to me. if that kind of behavior is enough to be acceptable to you you'll be glad to hear that it's quite normal behavior at that age. conformity is a very strong psychological force and an important one as well. if people choose to play the consumerist game i wouldn't give up on them. it's also natural. your view of your fellow humans sometimes seems bitter and unrealistic to me. have you ever tried travelling?In each case I had different reasons. I suppose intentions do matter. The young man in the article seemed more articulate than most kids his age, and thus what he is doing seems smarter and more informed than 95% of kids who wear name brands for the most superficial of reasons: mass conformity. If anything, the majority of these kids more closely resemble racist, narrow-minded behavior than the guy in the article. I'm not saying his reasons were perfect, but he certainly seems more thoughtful about his life than the vast majority. And given an opportunity to have conversation either with him or most bourgeois, apathetic, one-dimensional kids which populate this country of ours, I'd much rather spend my time with him.
Is the media around the world speaks a bit about the action of Canada at Durban? Or nobody cares about Canada anyway?
I don't really consider myself canadian, even if it's what written on my passport. I'm from Qubec, I'm speaking french which is the official language of my province, we have code civil here (as in France), we have a very distinct culture and a very distinct society (at least, that's what we like to think...).
We are respecting Kyoto here! The only province in Canada that is, even if there is good effort in British Columbia and to a lesser measure in Ontario.
A counter-argument would of course be that certain symbols, such as the American or Nazi flags, have historically determined meanings, and thus it's irrational to expect others not to make judgements based on those socially recognized meanings. To some extent that's true, but even socially accepted markers of meaning are prone to artistic reinvention. Hence I always thought it ironic that the very people who judged me to be racist were themselves formulating knee-jerk responses akin to racism.
As for non-conformist behavior being "normal" at his age, that's somewhat true: kids tend to take more risks than their elders. But at the same time there is non-conformity which is really just another layer of mindless trend-following, and then there is non-conformity which takes genuine risks with the ritualized barriers of self-identity.
I wonder if I can scan one of my old pics from back in the day and put it up as my avatar? That would be funny...
i agree.I suppose in both cases, for the conformist and the non-conformist alike, there are potential psychological traps---but these traps can be avoided in both cases when the individuals honestly reflect on the reasons for their behavior. Hence in neither case can we presume that that kind of self-honesty isn't possible.
But I totally get what you were trying to say in your youth. I think it's pretty similar to what the kid with the Confederate flag is doing in a way. He just doesn't want to be pigeonholed which is totally understandable.
the ad hominem "he is just looking for attention" is here appropriate because it was directed at a comment of yours which indicated that the guy is somehow doing something noteworthy and laudable that distinguished him from his contemporaries while my point was that this is normal behavior.
That's not to say that some of these groups won't be able to work together for a common cause. None of us can survive without others. Nevertheless we can't help but judge the world according to our lived values. Multiculturalism pretends to respect all diverse cultural values, but ultimately it's an attempt to weaken society by supressing our natural hostilities toward one another.
But I think a confederate flag or a nazi flag dont exactly say "i'm going to kill you" quite like burning a cross in your yard does.
I'm inclined to draw a fine line where I ban gang patches (for gangs which you make illegal, which can be done quite liberally) but allow nazi flags...
Maybe I look at it a bit differently but that the NAZI killed lots of people doesnt directly lead to their flag meaning "I'm going to kill you" in all context. Afterall the US flag doesn't generally mean "I'm going to kill you", nor does the Chinese one.
Wow! Fantastic exchange on the 19 yr old kid. Glad I posted that one.
This aired on UniVision just last week. It means "The Iranian Threat". It's a major expose on Iran (along w/Venezuela, Cuba) & if you can speak Spanish, you will likely find it eye-opening as you've heard nothing of this in Western media. It's quite interesting that no Western news source has carried this story yet as it's a major journalistic investigation on the order of 60 minutes, Nightline, etc... with significant relevance to the international scene right now. For those that think Iran isn't active internationally in terrorist planning, using high ranking government officials, etc... this coverage puts that misguided belief completely to shame. Iran is also seeking to be in bed with the drug cartels for funding to counteract the international channels while the drug cartels get cheap, motivated, & plentiful muscle. It's a win-win for both groups. We ourselves have on-the-ground contacts in Colombia that confirm this. The results are absolutely frightening & devastating for poor people trying to live a simple & righteous life as murder/mayhem/forced desertion is commonplace, especially of church members/leaders, government officials, etc....
It's just insane something of this enormity is being ignored in the Western media due to "walking on eggshells" phenomenon (imo) as relating to Islamists & Palestinian agenda as well as Venezuela & Cuba involvement. Oh well, stupid is as stupid does.
That's what's happening on the ground in Colombia. Small towns have virtually no government protection & the cartels + Islamists can come in & simply murder/intimidate/etc... to their heart's content. It's incredibly terrifying & it's personally affecting as we know many people there.
I doubt the USA is doing that specifically, although I could agree it would engage in spying & destabilization activities as any normal adversarial government does.
To think what is happening is worse then what was done by US or most government calls for a review of historical data.
Thinking that one is good and the other is bad only feeds more hatred between people.
anyway, you're acting on the assumption that the US government generally tells the truth and is morally intact while i'm not which is why our opinions on such matters will naturally deviate rather harshly.
Last edited by ShowtekGER; 12-12-2011 at 01:41 PM.
you express this argument quite often but i'm not sure if i understand it. assuming that it is true that hostilities between groups are natural, what is your proposal on how to live side by side?That's not to say that some of these groups won't be able to work together for a common cause. None of us can survive without others. Nevertheless we can't help but judge the world according to our lived values. Multiculturalism pretends to respect all diverse cultural values, but ultimately it's an attempt to weaken society by supressing our natural hostilities toward one another.
anyway, the basis for such a claim isn't that strong either. i know some theories about in- and out-groups which convincingly make the same statement as you but i also know equally convincing social constructionist theories which posit the opposite. more importantly, my personal life experience pressingly tells me that you're wrong because i know that hostilities only exist as long as we accept them as such. and lack of such acceptance can be reached by proper education, upbringing, individual reflection, etc. i too believe that the purpose of existence somewhat implies antagonisms between and in humans as well as other conflicts but they're there to be overcome.
Instead you decided to go the nonsense route. Basically, you're pontificating w/o any actual data to draw from. Might I add the US Government had nothing to do with this investigation so your statement of a non-existent assumption is nothing more than an illusion conjured up at will to disguise the intellectual void of your position which is based on on nothing more than conjecture, specious arguments, presumed psychic powers, & prejudice since by your own admission, you really don't have a clue about the story content itself. Amazing, you even wrote a response (well not really, expected & devoid of content as expected as well). I guess data is simply irrelevant, huh? At least you're consistent.