Is it disrespectful to sit during the Pledge?

[Neutraligon]

Civics is not taught till much later, namely 9th grade. History is taught...a very white washed version of history.

White washed is subjective and also commonly used by cultural marxists to increase tensions between ethnic groups and spread disunity, not saying you are one btw.

No it really isn't since the US history taught in school specifically ignores many of the internal struggles the US faced (besides slavery of course).

[True Refuge]

For which it stands is speaking about the flag. basically it is saying I pledge allegiance to the Republic but more convoluted since it sound better I guess.

And the flag is the symbol of America's ideals (in a sense). And I guess pledging to the Republic is sort of like pledging to Democracy, or our specific system of it?

That's not a very good thing to pledge allegiance to either.

[Necroghastia]

Civics is not taught till much later, namely 9th grade. History is taught...a very white washed version of history.

White washed is subjective and also commonly used by cultural marxists to increase tensions between ethnic groups and spread disunity, not saying you are one btw.

I mean, you can't really say anyone is in good faith, since there's no such thing as a cultural marxist.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

That dosnt change that deplatforming is used to shut down someones speech.

Its not permanent, you can buy megaphone, but it is a tactic to quell anothers expressions.

Why should someone be forced to be associated with someone else's opinions?

Why should we expect to be catered to by some business when we blatantly ignore its rules of conduct again?

[Plzen]

Hence why the definition can be conveniently used to deride the entirety of left-wing thought and activism, since "Marxesque" covers everything up to "maybe capitalism isn't perfect????"

It's the usual linguistic manipulation of abstract concepts to demonstrate a point that doesn't actually hold up.

"Cultural Marxism" doesn't really have any substance to it. It's just a nationalist catch-all phrase for "things we oppose." "The things we oppose are cultural Marxism, and therefore bad" is the kind of statement that is by definition true, and statements that are true by definition do not deliver any useful information. It only sounds like a meaningful point because language is used in such a way to make it look like a meaningful point.

[Fahran]

It's not really unthinking loyalty if you teach them civics and history, and then do not mandate the pledge.

Civics is not taught till much later, namely 9th grade. History is taught...a very white washed version of history.

I learned about the Trail of Tears in 5th grade and about slavery in 7th grade...

[True Refuge]

White washed is subjective and also commonly used by cultural marxists to increase tensions between ethnic groups and spread disunity, not saying you are one btw.

No it really isn't since the US history taught in school specifically ignores many of the internal struggles the US faced (besides slavery of course).

Australia's also a great example. The Aboriginal peoples have lived in this continent for 60,000 years, with complex cultures, ingenious knowledge such as nomadic agriculture, and a million other interesting things, but they basically don't get a mention in our school system apart from "colonizers killed them sometimes oof".

[San Montalbano]

That dosnt change that deplatforming is used to shut down someones speech.

Its not permanent, you can buy megaphone, but it is a tactic to quell anothers expressions.

Why should someone be forced to be associated with someone else's opinions?

Nothing is stopping the individuals who do not want to be there from leaving.

[Tekeristan]

Hence why the definition can be conveniently used to deride the entirety of left-wing thought and activism, since "Marxesque" covers everything up to "maybe capitalism isn't perfect????"

It's the usual linguistic manipulation of abstract concepts to demonstrate a point that doesn't actually hold up.

"Cultural Marxism" doesn't really have any substance to it. It's just a nationalist catch-all phrase for "things we oppose." "The things we oppose are cultural Marxism, and therefore bad" is the kind of statement that is by definition true, and statements that are true by definition do not deliver any useful information. It only sounds like a meaningful point because language is used in such a way to make it look like a meaningful point.

It feeds into the whole conspiratorial 'undermining' thing by one group or another - it's about building a narrative

[The Strangers Club]

Civics is not taught till much later, namely 9th grade. History is taught...a very white washed version of history.

I learned about the Trail of Tears in 5th grade and about slavery in 7th grade...

Haven't we all?

[Neutraligon]

For which it stands is speaking about the flag. basically it is saying I pledge allegiance to the Republic but more convoluted since it sound better I guess.

And the flag is the symbol of America's ideals (in a sense). And I guess pledging to the Republic is sort of like pledging to Democracy, or our specific system of it?

The flag represents more then just the ideals though, it represents our form of government, the laws that we have, the people, possibly to some extent the land, and other things besides.

[Tekeristan]

Civics is not taught till much later, namely 9th grade. History is taught...a very white washed version of history.

I learned about the Trail of Tears in 5th grade and about slavery in 7th grade...

You've hardly started

[Biscany]

In my eyes, it's sort of like saying you couldn't care enough to stand up for like 10 seconds to the flag that countless of people have died over, which is why I always choose to do it. A lot of my uncles and cousins have served in the military and it wouldn't sit right with me if I disregarded the pledge despite it taking only a minute amount of my time and energy. To me it's just a quick and painless spiritual show of respect to those who've died to keep us safe.

Funny since like I said I would not stand for the pledge unless I feel the situation is appropriate, namely when joining the military or becoming a civil servant. At all other times I think the pledge should not be recited at all, and that it is disrespectful to use it. A pledge is something I take seriously, it is something that should not be said or stood for lightly. To show my respect to my country and to the people who have fought (both figuratively and actually) for the ideals I believe in (too many times the country has not stood for those ideals) I would not stand except in those most serious of circumstances. To do otherwise is to take it and that pledge lightly.

That's fair, but honestly it's up to the individual to take the pledge lightly or not.

[True Refuge]

Why should someone be forced to be associated with someone else's opinions?

Nothing is stopping the individuals who do not want to be there from leaving.

That's not what I was asking.

Why should someone, a private individual (or private organisation) be forced to give a platform to someone else? Is that not restricting their freedom of expression too?

[The Greater Ohio Valley]

You're indulging in mindful anti-nationalism.

Yep, free country, liberty and justice for all and all that Jazz. Doesn’t that freedom smell great?

Why not allow others bountiful opportunities to engage in mindful nationalism?

People can indulge in as much mindless nationalism as they want, so as long as they keep it to themselves and not socially shame others into indulging along with them by claiming “disrespect”.

And, on the contrary, removing emphasis on community and nation has led to a proliferation in narcissism and sociopathy.

I doubt you’re enough of a mental health expert to make such a bold claim. This line of thinking can also lead down the road of authoritarianism and totalitarianism in order to enforce said emphasis on community and nation, which would fly in the face of that whole liberty and justice for all thing that the nation stands for.

Those who complain about the pledge of allegiance are just as like to complain about the wealthy shirking their responsibilities.

Okay, and?

[Neutraligon]

Civics is not taught till much later, namely 9th grade. History is taught...a very white washed version of history.

I learned about the Trail of Tears in 5th grade and about slavery in 7th grade...

The trail of tears is not civics, slavery while related to civics is not taught as civics. Both of those are...made less onerous and are only a tiny part of our history.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Why should someone be forced to be associated with someone else's opinions?

Nothing is stopping the individuals who do not want to be there from leaving.

I am sitting in a restaurant, somebody not me flies into such a rage that he becomes a public nuisance. Should I and the rest of the guests - except this one raging person - be forced to decamp to another restaurant and leave this person to his barbaric antics? Is that what you think?

[Neutraligon]

Funny since like I said I would not stand for the pledge unless I feel the situation is appropriate, namely when joining the military or becoming a civil servant. At all other times I think the pledge should not be recited at all, and that it is disrespectful to use it. A pledge is something I take seriously, it is something that should not be said or stood for lightly. To show my respect to my country and to the people who have fought (both figuratively and actually) for the ideals I believe in (too many times the country has not stood for those ideals) I would not stand except in those most serious of circumstances. To do otherwise is to take it and that pledge lightly.

That's fair, but honestly it's up to the individual to take the pledge lightly or not.

Never said it wasn't, just that I do not see it as necessarily disrespectful to refuse to stand during it. People can have any number of reasons for not standing, from not supporting the idea of pledging to anything, to trying to show respect for what it means to pledge your allegiance.

[Fahran]

Hence why the definition can be conveniently used to deride the entirety of left-wing thought and activism, since "Marxesque" covers everything up to "maybe capitalism isn't perfect????"

It's the usual linguistic manipulation of abstract concepts to demonstrate a point that doesn't actually hold up.

"Cultural Marxism" doesn't really have any substance to it. It's just a nationalist catch-all phrase for "things we oppose." "The things we oppose are cultural Marxism, and therefore bad" is the kind of statement that is by definition true, and statements that are true by definition do not deliver any useful information. It only sounds like a meaningful point because language is used in such a way to make it look like a meaningful point.

I usually interpret Cultural Marxism as denoting a wide set of ideologies and paradigms that divide society into oppressor and oppressed classes in imitation of proper Marxist theory, but a lot of those who seem to employ it often mutter about arguments related to critical theory and post-modernism. Really, it's a way of comparing the modern Left to the Maoists who hopped ship in the sixties and seventies. It works because a lot of those people are somewhat similar if not the same.

[Biscany]

And the flag is the symbol of America's ideals (in a sense). And I guess pledging to the Republic is sort of like pledging to Democracy, or our specific system of it?

The flag represents more then just the ideals though, it represents our form of government, the laws that we have, the people, possibly to some extent the land, and other things besides.

That's funny to think about; "I pledge my allegiance to the land, every American tree, river, and mountain in this beautiful nation!"

[San Montalbano]

Nothing is stopping the individuals who do not want to be there from leaving.

That's not what I was asking.

Why should someone, a private individual (or private organisation) be forced to give a platform to someone else? Is that not restricting their freedom of expression too?

Sure, but that sword cuts both ways, are you saying it would be okay to deplatform others because you disagree with them?

If they are receiving any federal money then that should not be the case since everyone pays into that.

[True Refuge]

And, on the contrary, removing emphasis on community and nation has led to a proliferation in narcissism and sociopathy.

I doubt you’re enough of a mental health expert to make such a bold claim. This line of thinking can also lead down the road of authoritarianism and totalitarianism in order to enforce said emphasis on community and nation, which would fly in the face of that whole liberty and justice for all thing that the nation stands for.

Indeed. Perhaps it should be mentioned that the US is renowned for its widespread, often strange patriotism, but at the same time for its individualism and selfishness. I don't see patriotism or sense of community being effective in that regard.

[The Greater Ohio Valley]

Why should someone be forced to be associated with someone else's opinions?

Nothing is stopping the individuals who do not want to be there from leaving.

There’s also nothing that guarantees a platform for said speech, just right to said speech.

[Tekeristan]

Keep in mind most right wingers dismiss modern psychology anyway so their arguments are laughable and uneducated, without basis in actual science.

They're by definition reactionary, not evolutionary

[Fahran]

I learned about the Trail of Tears in 5th grade and about slavery in 7th grade...

Haven't we all?

Apparently, we're whitewashing history in some places.