Is it disrespectful to sit during the Pledge?

[Tekeristan]

In high school? We don’t.

AP/IB classes definitely do.

My own APUSH class definitely left a lot things out. It tells you a lot but doesn't necessarily teach how you to analyze things.

[Kowani]

In high school? We don’t.

AP/IB classes definitely do.

I took APUSH last year. Naaah.
You see patterns (poor western farmers) but there’s no analysis thereof.

[San Montalbano]

-snip-

As I said before, if you intend to keep using cultural Marxism as some kind of scapegoat you need to first convince us that there exists such a coherent concept as cultural Marxism.

Still haven't gotten a satisfactory response to this:

So you defined an imagined abstraction in terms of more imagined abstractions. But fair enough. Let's look at those things one by one.

"Class struggle" - so do you not believe that people in similar economic situations ought to collectively advocate for their common interests?
"Oppression politics" - is political oppression not an issue that concern you a great deal? should we not seek to reduce societal oppression?
"Political correctness" - this is a meaningless term. "correct" according to what standard? the original definition was the CPSU party line, but those guys don't exist any more

Ive already explained what i believed cultura marxism to be, this was adressed prior.

Class struggle: classes should collaberate, class struggle is marxist rhetoric to divide rich and poor and foster revolt.

Oppression politics: the political manuvering to paint yourself/group as a victim and demand unrqual benefits or reparations, among other things. There will always be an oppressed vs opressor theme to cultural marxists because that is the foundation of their beleifs.

Political correctness was, as you said, a communist party line. Words are manipulated to foster ease of fear such as progressive, undocumented immigrant. Communism fell as a global ideology, much like fascism fell in the past. The goal for communism is to evolve by simply rewriting what words mean.

[True Refuge]

Closed borders and hate speech do not define the united states, The consitution defines the United States, as do things like the bill of rights

Cultural marxists do control positions of power within the education system to an unrivalved degree.

It’s actually impressive and commands a degree of respect how they can brainwash students and turn the nation inside out. Lenin would admire that tactic.

Traditioms have eroded in many ones, a small example are kids being called racist or bigoted for celebrating fourth of july or supporting george washington, citing him as illegitament because he was a slave owner.

Things change. Is change bad? The constitution was literally made with the explicit intent to keep power to a small minority of white wealthy land owners and to keep back the "mob" that was everyone else. We only vote for Senators because of reform. Would that be 'Kultural Bolshevism"?

I'd like to see your sources for that. Of course your 'definition' of "cultural Marxists" is going to start bending towards anyone with an even liberal social progressivism.
You don't know a thing about Lenin.

That's cute. That's the traditions we're supposed to die over? A holiday where we pop fireworks and get together to consume quantities of alcohol, and purchase hotdogs and hamburgers? Or is it really about, you know, the whole meaning behind it! You know, the pursuit of independence (In the interests of nativist ruling class), of liberal liberty (private ownership so again just the former), and all of which America has done to pursue the interests of democracy and rights across the world (yay operation Condor). I'm sure the vast consumerism made rampant doesn't undermine these things in of itself.

I’d imagine the broad category of libertarian socialism, and specifically market socialism would blow their mind.

Yep, a large portion of modern American traditions are the result of corporate ad campaigns and social engineering. It’s all a bit of a sham.

[Fahran]

AP/IB classes definitely do.

My own APUSH class definitely left a lot things out. It tells you a lot but doesn't necessarily teach how you to analyze things.

We had an entire mini-course on Reconstruction and Jim Crow. I believe we even compared and contrasted different forms of slavery at one point. You can't cover everything at that level, but you can get the gist of it by and large. Really, to hit everything, you need several college courses with dense assigned reading.

We can't just neglect to grant citizenship and associated rituals to the vast majority of the population that doesn't have a scholar's understanding of particular abuses and grievances. You hit the major points and move on.

[San Montalbano]

Closed borders and hate speech do not define the united states, The consitution defines the United States, as do things like the bill of rights

Cultural marxists do control positions of power within the education system to an unrivalved degree.

It’s actually impressive and commands a degree of respect how they can brainwash students and turn the nation inside out. Lenin would admire that tactic.

Traditioms have eroded in many ones, a small example are kids being called racist or bigoted for celebrating fourth of july or supporting george washington, citing him as illegitament because he was a slave owner.

Things change. Is change bad? The constitution was literally made with the explicit intent to keep power to a small minority of white wealthy land owners and to keep back the "mob" that was everyone else. We only vote for Senators because of reform. Would that be 'Kultural Bolshevism"?

I'd like to see your sources for that. Of course your 'definition' of "cultural Marxists" is going to start bending towards anyone with an even liberal social progressivism.
You don't know a thing about Lenin.

That's cute. That's the traditions we're supposed to die over? A holiday where we pop fireworks and get together to consume quantities of alcohol, and purchase hotdogs and hamburgers? Or is it really about, you know, the whole meaning behind it! You know, the pursuit of independence (In the interests of nativist ruling class), of liberal liberty (private ownership so again just the former), and all of which America has done to pursue the interests of democracy and rights across the world (yay operation Condor). I'm sure the vast consumerism made rampant doesn't undermine these things in of itself.

Yes i agree consumerism has become a problem

Classic liberals are not cultural marxist, classic liberals do not advocate use of force or class struggle.

[Plzen]

-snip-

So, essentially, the "cultural Marxism" we are all supposed to fear is an ideology that recognises that different economic classes have different interests, argues that there exists such a thing as oppression that ought to be corrected, and that uses politicised language to push its narrative.

...this is the great fear that we're supposed to feel threatened by? We here on the left have a word for people who don't fall under that definition of "cultural Marxist." It's called "reactionary," and I feel pretty comfortable putting you in that box if you oppose cultural Marxism as you defined it.

[Tekeristan]

As I said before, if you intend to keep using cultural Marxism as some kind of scapegoat you need to first convince us that there exists such a coherent concept as cultural Marxism.

Still haven't gotten a satisfactory response to this:

Ive already explained what i believed cultura marxism to be, this was adressed prior.

Class struggle: classes should collaberate, class struggle is marxist rhetoric to divide rich and poor and foster revolt.

Oppression politics: the political manuvering to paint yourself/group as a victim and demand unrqual benefits or reparations, among other things. There will always be an oppressed vs opressor theme to cultural marxists because that is the foundation of their beleifs.

Political correctness was, as you said, a communist party line. Words are manipulated to foster ease of fear such as progressive, undocumented immigrant. Communism fell as a global ideology, much like fascism fell in the past. The goal for communism is to evolve by simply rewriting what words mean.

> Cultural Marxism believes in class collaberationism
> It believes in 'pretending' to be a 'victim'!

Begone. You know nothing of what you speak, which is extremely typical. Allow me to ask this.
Why do blacks supposedly commit the majority of crime? You are faced with two options. Either it is something to do with their 'race' or 'culture' which somehow stands independent of their material circumstances (Just the way they are!), or it is the history of and current material and social conditions of which they live. If it is the latter, then your so called "Oppression politics" point is utter nonsense.

[Neutraligon]

Sorry I think I need to stop since this is getting into threadjack territory.

Not really. Your argument was essentially that the pledge and our teaching of history amounted to indoctrination. Judging by the number of people, mostly older adolescents and younger adults, who jumped in to argue that America did bad things, any indoctrination was an abject failure.

None of which has to do with if sitting during the pledge is in fact disrespectful.

[San Montalbano]

-snip-

So, essentially, the "cultural Marxism" we are all supposed to fear is an ideology that recognises that different economic classes have different interests, that there exists such a thing as oppression that ought to be corrected, and that uses politicised language to push its narrative.

...this is the great fear that we're supposed to feel threatened by? We here on the left have a word for people who don't fall under that definition of "cultural Marxist." It's called "reactionary," and I feel pretty comfortable putting you in that box if you oppose cultural Marxism as you defined it.

Boxes are labels, something that cultural marxists do in action but distance themselves from verbally.

Indeed you on the left have a great many words to describe many people.

[Gayda]

no

[Tekeristan]

-snip-

So, essentially, the "cultural Marxism" we are all supposed to fear is an ideology that recognises that different economic classes have different interests, argues that there exists such a thing as oppression that ought to be corrected, and that uses politicised language to push its narrative.

...this is the great fear that we're supposed to feel threatened by? We here on the left have a word for people who don't fall under that definition of "cultural Marxist." It's called "reactionary," and I feel pretty comfortable putting you in that box if you oppose cultural Marxism as you defined it.

By acknowledging that groups of people with entirely different economic interests and conditions have entirely different economic interests and conditions is undermining civilization, obviously

[Plzen]

Boxes are labels, something that cultural marxists do in action but distance themselves from verbally.

Indeed you on the left have a great many words to describe many people.

This coming from the person who used the label of "cultural Marxist" a dozen times in as many IC pages?

[Fahran]

Why do blacks supposedly commit the majority of crime? You are faced with two options. Either it is something to do with their 'race' or 'culture' which somehow stands independent of their material circumstances (Just the way they are!), or it is the history of and current material and social conditions of which they live. If it is the latter, then your so called "Oppression politics" point is utter nonsense.

Culture, material circumstances, history, social conditions, etc. These are actually interlinked. It likely has nothing to do with their race, genetics, or biology because they aren't that different from anybody else in those terms.

[Vassenor]

Are we still pretending that Cultural Marxism is actually a thing and not something the Nazis made up?

[Ifreann]

Respect isn't a function of benefits and harms. As I said, a person can quite reasonably judge the US not to be worthy of their respect without personally being a victim of America's crimes.

They can but it remains counter-intuitive that they hide behind the country as they denigrate it.

Not really. America can have some things that are good and some that are bad and a person might denounce the bad while benefiting from the good. Nothing counter-intuitive here, unless you think respect for a country must be an all or nothing affair. Love it or leave it. You're either with us or with the terrorists.

It also invites inquiry into why we should consider their opinions if they do not have positive contributions to make towards the community as loyal citizens.

Where on Earth did you get the idea that people who don't participate in the pledge do not have positive contributions to make towards the community?

Declining to participate in the pledge means one doesn't want to participate in the pledge. Trying to suggest that people who don't participate in the pledge must also hate the good things about America seems awfully disingenuous.

They're disrespecting America in its totality. That includes the good things that come with it. If you wanted to protest a particular bad thing, you could do that while still respecting the country as a whole.

Declining to participate in the pledge doesn't necessarily constitute a protest.

I could provide counter examples all day long. You'll just dismiss them and say that they're some of the few that don't fall into the categories you've outlined. Show me that what you've said is correct instead of playing the "You can't prove me wrong" game.

If I can reliably dismiss your examples, it suggests that they lack merit.

No it doesn't. It suggests nothing. You've left yourself enough space to say "Well that doesn't count" to literally anything I might say. So no, you prove your assertion to be true. I assume you have some kind of large scale survey of reasons for why people decline to participate in the pledge. That or you're just making shit up, like one of those "There are two kinds of people" things.

[Plzen]

By acknowledging that groups of people with entirely different economic interests and conditions have entirely different economic interests and conditions is undermining civilization, obviously

Pretty much. Some political ideologies stand on such a mountain of imagined abstractions, just asking for clear and concise definitions for their terms goes a long way towards showing how ridiculous those talking points are.

[San Montalbano]

Ive already explained what i believed cultura marxism to be, this was adressed prior.

Class struggle: classes should collaberate, class struggle is marxist rhetoric to divide rich and poor and foster revolt.

Oppression politics: the political manuvering to paint yourself/group as a victim and demand unrqual benefits or reparations, among other things. There will always be an oppressed vs opressor theme to cultural marxists because that is the foundation of their beleifs.

Political correctness was, as you said, a communist party line. Words are manipulated to foster ease of fear such as progressive, undocumented immigrant. Communism fell as a global ideology, much like fascism fell in the past. The goal for communism is to evolve by simply rewriting what words mean.

> Cultural Marxism believes in class collaberationism
> It believes in 'pretending' to be a 'victim'!

Begone. You know nothing of what you speak, which is extremely typical. Allow me to ask this.
Why do blacks supposedly commit the majority of crime? You are faced with two options. Either it is something to do with their 'race' or 'culture' which somehow stands independent of their material circumstances (Just the way they are!), or it is the history of and current material and social conditions of which they live. If it is the latter, then your so called "Oppression politics" point is utter nonsense.

Blacks commit crime because of the states failure to ensure cultural stability, it allowed things like rap(which often perpetuated killing, rap, drugs etc) to be a norm in black society.

Black society embraces this and raises its children on it, it is tragic as black and white are brothers of the same nation.

[Neutraligon]

Are we still pretending that Cultural Marxism is actually a thing and not something the Nazis made up?

I still find it funny that one of the people who made the pledge...was socialist

[Plzen]

Are we still pretending that Cultural Marxism is actually a thing and not something the Nazis made up?

To be fully fair, we as humans make up a great deal of imaginary things. It's part of what makes human society actually function.

[Neutraligon]

I still find it funny that one of the people who made the pledge...was socialist

Wait seriously?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pledge_of_Allegiance

[San Montalbano]

I still find it funny that one of the people who made the pledge...was socialist

Wait seriously?

Socialists are collectivists this comes as no surprise

[Fahran]

None of which has to do with if sitting during the pledge is in fact disrespectful.

You've offered one example where it might not be, and I'm inclined to question the sincerity of someone who chooses to sit because they feel they do not understand it given what they would know by the time they reached middle school. In any case, it's an appeal to one of the three categories I set aside - in this case ignorance.

And I don't mean to be a raging bitch but I tend to presume that other people learn as quickly as I do and am genuinely surprised when they do not. And I don't think of myself as being brilliant in the slightest. Maybe slightly above average at best.

[Tekeristan]

Why do blacks supposedly commit the majority of crime? You are faced with two options. Either it is something to do with their 'race' or 'culture' which somehow stands independent of their material circumstances (Just the way they are!), or it is the history of and current material and social conditions of which they live. If it is the latter, then your so called "Oppression politics" point is utter nonsense.

Culture, material circumstances, history, social conditions, etc. These are actually interlinked. It likely has nothing to do with their race, genetics, or biology because they aren't that different from anybody else in those terms.

Which is entirely my point, yes. Understanding the material circumstances, history, and conditions is what we would call "nuance". Researching and attempting to understand those historical events and social forces that led to where they were and are and to what ends (why) is apparently "Cultural Marxism" and "Oppression politics".

You're on a good path in taking an accelerated history course. It is a little better than the standard course of which is mandatory for most people. I would suggest you continue looking into the relations between things as you continue forward, if not to just have a better understanding of the spectrum as a whole, but to just know where people are coming from when they speak

[Fahran]

Wait seriously?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pledge_of_Allegiance

Yep.