Skip Navigation

Brendan's Daily Diatribe: Part Three

Travel Forums Off Topic Brendan's Daily Diatribe: Part Three

Page
  • 1
  • 2

Last Post

1. Posted by Brendan (Respected Member 1824 posts) 10y
  • Some content may be unsuitable for people that disagree*

BRENDAN'S DAILY DIATRIBE
---------------------------------------
Part Three - November 12, 2005
---------------------------------------

TOPIC: Debate
MOTIVATION: TP Chat

Anti-American. This is common label one can get for making a critical remark aginst the United States of America. Where does that come from? Lack of any real reply i would say. Likewise you make a comment against the state of Isreal you are labelled anti-semitic. How about a real debate with facts not just some general feeling of:

..you are not with us, so you are against us

Of course this can be attached to any group, the two I've mentioned above seem to be the most wide spread. I think groups like this get the idea in their head that it doesn't matter what the issue is, only it is against them and it must be stopped.

If someone brought up the fact Canada has an annual polar bear hunt in Ottawa and they think it is horrible. I wouldn't say "you must be Anti-Canadian".

  • NOTE*

For those concerned I bring up the United States because they have the most effect on the world today. Every decision made requires the attention of everyone. Around the world.

2. Posted by Isadora (Travel Guru 13926 posts) 10y

After just leaving a 4 hour chat with you - I'll have to get back to this one... (Brain needs rest!!!)

3. Posted by Brendan (Respected Member 1824 posts) 10y

yeah I need a holiday from that one.. haha

4. Posted by ukmassage (Inactive 1052 posts) 10y

nationalism is not a rational motion - so from the nationalists don't expect a logical answer.

somebody who's world view is blinded by patriotism etc might be using just attack-defend, black-and-white, we-and-them schemes which give easy answers.

5. Posted by igetlost (Full Member 89 posts) 10y

my own disclaimer " i am not racsist ,anti-semitic,sexist or any of that other pc crap.i am a little drunk and enjoy pissing people off." also the rhetoric is prob alittle off....alcohol does that!!!!'); also i dont think i'm answering the diatribe debate!!???

anti-american is a phrase coined to easily refute large volumes of bad publicity.
you may insult a specific aspect but it is then twisted and corrupted easily by giving your original problem the sense of a direct attack on all sides of the whole and therefore it nulifies your initial point.it also works for other large groups anti-semitic,anti-democratic.

i understand looking after you company interests and as a whole the usa is a large company.
it is a company based on the drive to control and allow ease of access to rotten compressed biological material that has had an enormous amount of pressure(generating heat) on it.
this material is the basis for all the largest industries worldwide.
the problem i have is that, although we all know otherwise,we are always told things happen for reasons other than money or greed.

the state of israel arose from private money, private lobbyists,personal ambition and to a lesser extent guilt.the world changes,borders are altered,countries change their names,divide up but if" 2000 years ago this was yours well i'm very sorry here you go.take it all back."

lets take examples shall we:
1. north american native tribes: no
2. south american native tribes: no
3. scotland: no
4. wales: no
5. ireland: not fully
6. native Australian tribes: no
7. tibet: no
8. anywhere in africa: no
9. iraq,iran,kuwait: original borders: no
10. the state of israel: yes

the yellowstone bears are now the latest under attack by american bastards!!(please reread
the disclaimer and dont shout)javascript:insertAtCursor(document.Form.Message,%20'');

The grizzly, or Ursus horribilis, is one of America’s most fabled animals, and once roamed unchecked from the Great Plains to the Pacific Ocean.
By 1975, however, after hunting and the destruction of much of their habitat because of human expansion, only 200 grizzlies survived in the greater Yellowstone area.
Today, after one of the greatest accomplishments of the Endangered Species Act, more than 600 grizzlies live in the greater Yellowstone region.
The population is growing at between 4 per cent and 7 per cent a year. Many scientists, and the US Fish & Wildlife Service, believe that Yellowstone holds as many bears as its landscape can support.

but however by next week a bill will be passed to ensure their slaughter.terrible in itsself but even more so when you read the fine print which allows for the immediate restructuring of oil pipe lines in the area surrounding yellowstone park which at the moment are fixed due to the grizzly population.

bad george bush bad bad bad!!!!

6. Posted by beerman (Respected Member 1631 posts) 10y

Quoting Brendan

Anti-American. This is common label one can get for making a critical remark aginst the United States of America. Where does that come from?

Ignorance. Plain and simple. Technically, Right Wing Conservative ignorance. The Right Wing wants people to believe that we all share a common goal. The Left Wing wants people to believe we all share a common goal. Those of us in the middle realize that the extremes of Right vs. Left are not extremes at all......they are the same pile of steaming turds stinking up Washington DC, just wearing different colored ties.

Anti-American. Ahh, what a joke. In the largest Democracy in the world, apparently dissention is not permitted. "If yer not with us, yer agin us..." so quoted our highly intelligent, scholarly President. Who the f*ck is this moron? And what's up with all the Left Wingers in Congress nodding their heads in approval of this statement? They are all crap. Freedom? Yeah, that has become a trademarked word here. We're securing the Freedom (TM) of the world by fighting the invisible War on Terror (TM)? It's a war that can never be won, so our government can continue to fight and spend jillions of dollars on the military-industrial complex, etc, etc, making all their cronies rich beyond obsenity with the peoples' hard earned money. These A**HOLES deserve to be gutted and left to die in the streets. Of course, both sides would be represented.

But I digress....
Actually, the whole statement on Anti-anyone comes from fear. Well, ignorance as well. The speaker tries to whip up a frenzied support from the masses for a cause few really understand. They throw in things like "patriotism", and "those people done us wrong". And the relatively uneducated masses suck it up like mothers milk because they're too lazy to stop and think about it. "They? Who's they? Why would they hate us, or attack us? Oh, look, honey, NASCAR'S on TV...grab me a Bud Light."
(Right, nothing per se against NASCAR...). People are becoming increasingly more selfish here, and that selfishness will manifest itself in "patriotism".

So, the Right tells us that we must be Anti-American if we (or others) don't agree with their viewpoint. The Left tells us "might" be Anti-American if we don't agree with their viewpoint, but only after exhaustive studies and counseling sessions to examine "why" we feel the need to disagree.

You know, the means test for serving in politics shouldn'e be "how much money can you spend on a campaign", but rather, "play well with others and tell the truth, or we'll gut you and leave you in the street".

I'd like to be the first one to step up and declare myself to be Anti-A**hole. That would put me at odds with 95% or more of the America's politicians (there must be some good ones...law of averages). It would also put me at odds with every extremist in America. And by extremist, I mean ANYONE who tells me that I have to live my life according to their doctrines. F*CK YOU AND THE A**HOLE WHO SHOWED YOU HOW TO STAND UPRIGHT. This will include virtually all politicians, religious leaders, Republicans, Democrats, Right-to-Lifers, Earth First-ers, the Animal Liberation Front (ALF, or as I like to call them "androgynous lackey fools"), more religious zealot bastards, most chemical companies, all "instant" food producers, food "scientists", the NRA and anyone else advocating wholesale slaughter with firearms, hhmmmm, who am I missing here..... Madison Avenue?

Why can't people let others have differing viewpoints? Why does a small minority have to coerce the majority to their view with threats (i.e. Anti-something). I don't mind listening to the rhetoric, I believe it is everyone's right to spout off a bit, but don't dare tell me I'm wrong and you're right and that's the end of that. You're right for you, and I'm right for me, and stay on your side of the fence. Quit moving your fence into my yard. If that's the way things are going to be, then I'm going to demand that the Flying Spaghetti Monster be elected Pope. And I won't stop until everyone bends to my will.....

...steps off soapbox, takes a breath, calms down, gets angry again, calms down again.....

7. Posted by tway (Travel Guru 7273 posts) 10y

At the risk of repeating myself, I recently saw a documentary (made by a French team) on American Evangelicals. One of the scariest things I've ever watched!

They showed one group who'd opened a Christian bank - where they pray to see if God thinks loaning money to so-and-so is a good idea. They especially like non-Christian clients as that means they have an opportunity to convert them. When confronted with the argument that Jesus kicked the moneylenders out of the temple, they retorted with: oh, ha ha ha, we're not moneylenders, we're Christians.

They also showed a big debutante-like ball, where girls and their fathers were celebrating the girls' promise to practice abstinance until marriage. They had to swear this to their fathers! And sign an agreement! Abstinance is a personal choice - it's rather archaic to sign that power over to your father!

It was all very "if you're not for us, you're against us". Two Democrats interviewed likened the Evangelical movement to the rise of the Taliban in Afghanistan, where church and state became intertwined and the government ended up being run by religious leaders.

I'm not sure how this all connects to Anti-Americanism - maybe only because the people running these sorts of things are so very, bloody loud about it - and about the fact that they're American. There is a great cultural plurality in the US, but they won't let you get a word in edgewise about it. Such differences of opinion, according to one religious leader, was 'the work of Satan among us'.

8. Posted by john7buck (Respected Member 458 posts) 10y

Sitting at my computer, once again quietly applauding beerman.

I guess to understand America you just have to come to grips with the fact that we are so BIG that half of the country is always going to seem completely insane and dillusional to the other half. The pissing matches often get so out of hand that all sense of reason just gets thrown out the door. I should amend the half and half theory to include what Beerman alluded to: there is then a group of people in the middle (let's just call them the rational) who are left afraid to pick sides.

It's a sad commentary when Anti-American can be equated to looking at things with a sense of reason. Whoops, there I go; back on the government watch list.

9. Posted by Brendan (Respected Member 1824 posts) 10y

OOo replies!

1. north american native tribes: no
2. south american native tribes: no
3. scotland: no
4. wales: no
5. ireland: not fully
6. native Australian tribes: no
7. tibet: no
8. anywhere in africa: no
9. iraq,iran,kuwait: original borders: no
10. the state of israel: yes

I like that point you made igetlost. And have to agree that if why isreal why not the others?

Now beerman, I agree with much of what you have to say but not all. It seems you are saying that people shouldn't tell others what to do or how to do it. Saying that they are right and the others are wrong.

But sounds to me like you are saying jsut that. That they are wrong by saying they are right and you are wrong and you are saying you are right? Sounds like a pardox to me.

But I get your point, that "I" can't say to "you", this is how you need to live your life, this is what you need to think, and this is what you need to do.

But the thing is these people and groups have, I think, sincere beliefs that they are in fact right. So how can you really stop that. The person that believes in the right in animals is going to fight for that regardless if you want them to or not. The person that things every single person on the planet should be armed to the nines is going to work towards that.

The conflict comes when these "rights" clash. From what I can tell you are saying that you are in the "middle" and consider everyone else not in the middle wrong? That doesn't make any sense. I'll stop there and perhaps you could clarify?

And Tway, that is some scary stuff. It does seem things are going to the extremes right now. And they are starting to clash. Sparks are flashing, but soon it will be flames. So I guess there are a few options.

-Choose one of the extremes.
-Choose the middle and declare the extremes wrong (an extreme unto itself?).
-Transcend the phyiscal world.

10. Posted by Isadora (Travel Guru 13926 posts) 10y

Quoting john7buck

I should amend the half and half theory to include what Beerman alluded to: there is then a group of people in the middle (let's just call them the rational) who are left afraid to pick sides.

I'm only sitting here because I needed to send a PM and e-mail, but then looked at Off Topic...

I also have to agree with Beerman (and not just because we have spent 20 years together - doesn't work that way in this house...). But, I don't agree with John (sorry John) that the people of middle ground are afraid to pick sides. I don't believe they have a side from which to pick. You are damned if you head right and damned if you head left. At this particular place in time - all roads lead to Rome and Rome is burning.

Anti-American. This is common label one can get for making a critical remark aginst the United States of America. Where does that come from? Lack of any real reply i would say.

For the general public, it is not a lack of reply, but a you're not understanding that we are saving the world for everyone in it attitude. Of course we are not saving the world, but that is the rhetoric that is dished out daily. The majority of the US citizens do not see/hear the news in any form. They do not read the newspapers (other than non-world-news-related sections), watch newscasts or listen to radio broadcasts. Okay, before you say the news is skewed - I agree. But, they work in news snippits. They see the headlines, catch the crawlers across their screens or see/hear nothing at all. So, take the uniformed, mix them with the politicians and what you get is a group of people who truly think you are with us or agin us - doesn't matter what the cause ie: war, relief aid, etc.

As far as Tina's comments... I need a few moments to gather my thoughts there. I do agree but there is so much to say... ;)