The PokéCommunity Forums

The PokéCommunity Forums (https://www.pokecommunity.com/index.php)
-   Deep Discussion (https://www.pokecommunity.com/forumdisplay.php?f=39)
-   -   Gadsden Flag is Racial Harassment? (https://www.pokecommunity.com/showthread.php?t=374951)

Somewhere_ August 4th, 2016 8:02 PM

Gadsden Flag is Racial Harassment?
 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/08/03/wearing-dont-tread-on-me-insignia-could-be-punishable-racial-harassment/

This is being debated and possibly passed on grounds that it is racist. And i haven't posted in a while so yea.

For those not in the US, the Gadsden Flag has a long history of being a symbol of freedom with origins back to a comic by Benjamin Franklin writing "Join or Die" with a snake in pieces representing the different colonies (during the Revolutionary War). "Dont tread on me" is more self-explanatory- dont tread on my rights, or anyone else's.

Personally, I have the words in my avatar on PC and I wear a T-shirt that has a modified version of the Gadsden flag (its all black instead of yellow and it replaces "me" with "anyone"). I am not racist in the slightest and I detest racism. Its cruel, rude, and breeds a low-trust society.

I can understand why this should be passed, and can sort of sympathize, except just because the maker was a racist (we have many inventions created by racists, but those inventions aren't called "racist"), and some racist people wear the flag (i dont think this means it is racist).

Are these harassment laws going too far? Is the Gadsden Flag a racist symbol?

Biogoji August 4th, 2016 8:27 PM

Harassment laws are going way too far. This is a prime example, people need to stop bitching and moaning about things like this. This flag is not racist in the slightest it's just standing up for up for what people believe in. In this case is their rights. And if that's racist then feel free to call me a bigot.

Aliencommander1245 August 4th, 2016 11:18 PM

It seems as though it was just a case of racial harassment where the perpetrator was wearing that symbol rather than a case of the symbol meaning anything similar on a broad scale

It's different to the confederate flag, something that is very intrinsically intertwined with racial issues, but as it seems to have come into contemporary use as a "conservative symbol" though it's use by the Tea Party that does sort of lump racist people under the banner it is symbolic for with that use

Overall i don't think it should be banned or restricted as it's not really a symbol that's used for racism/racist causes

CoffeeDrink August 5th, 2016 3:31 AM

Well, I suppose all of our education and poverty problems are solved if we have the time to complain about flags. While we're at it:

We better abolish the Marine Corps, the Navy, Army, airforce and the Presidency. All of our governmental seats. Break all the TVs, live in the dark, stop watching Disney cartoons and all their affiliates, ban chocolate chip cookies, rebel against McDonald's, KFC, Taco Bell, and Domino's, torch all the Dr. Seuss stories, blow up all the planes, trains, and automobiles, stop using traffic signals, stop using fire extinguishers, stop using money, stop paying taxes and eating anything and everything that Nestlé and Nabisco produce (a fuck ton of everything) stop drinking beer, wine and spirits, wearing clothes, watching FOX and all it'seems affiliates, using shampoo and soap, drinking Coca-Cola, anything PepsiCo owns, shopping at Wal-Mart, Home Depot, Ace Hardware, Lowe's, Kohl's, TJ Maxx, Petroleum, Pets Mart, Matches, Tents, Fishing poles, motors, Games Stop, Panda Express, UPS, the USPS, using watches, FedEx, Computers, Printers, using alarm clocks and canned foods, handguns, long guns, shoes, prescription drugs and music, any razor or electric razor, deodorizer and candy. All that shit, right? Living in caves butt naked with no flashlight is my dream. Ban all the things!

This is beginning to get ridiculous. I wonder if there are any openings in North Korea? I'll probably have less to bitch about there. For fuck's sake, Jesus! Ban all the books too. Forgot that one.

Tired of all these ass hurt bitches and all these fake ass n-


I would like to pre-apologize to any whom I might offend

XSE August 5th, 2016 6:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CoffeeDrink (Post 9353077)
Well, I suppose all of our education and poverty problems are solved if we have the time to complain about flags. While we're at it:

We better abolish the Marine Corps, the Navy, Army, airforce and the Presidency. All of our governmental seats. Break all the TVs, live in the dark, stop watching Disney cartoons and all their affiliates, ban chocolate chip cookies, rebel against McDonald's, KFC, Taco Bell, and Domino's, torch all the Dr. Seuss stories, blow up all the planes, trains, and automobiles, stop using traffic signals, stop using fire extinguishers, stop using money, stop paying taxes and eating anything and everything that Nestlé and Nabisco produce (a **** ton of everything) stop drinking beer, wine and spirits, wearing clothes, watching FOX and all it'seems affiliates, using shampoo and soap, drinking Coca-Cola, anything PepsiCo owns, shopping at Wal-Mart, Home Depot, Ace Hardware, Lowe's, Kohl's, TJ Maxx, Petroleum, Pets Mart, Matches, Tents, Fishing poles, motors, Games Stop, Panda Express, UPS, the USPS, using watches, FedEx, Computers, Printers, using alarm clocks and canned foods, handguns, long guns, shoes, prescription drugs and music, any razor or electric razor, deodorizer and candy. All that ****, right? Living in caves butt naked with no flashlight is my dream. Ban all the things!

This is beginning to get ridiculous. I wonder if there are any openings in North Korea? I'll probably have less to ***** about there. For ****'s sake, Jesus! Ban all the books too. Forgot that one.

Tired of all these ass hurt *****es and all these fake ass n-


I would like to pre-apologize to any whom I might offend

Keked at this. Funny stuff mate.

Pretty much said all that needs to be said. People who whine and complain about everything are really getting on my nerves. "Hurr durr, racial something! Gotta ban it!"
It's a flag with a snake on it for Christ sake. Just stop breeding. Stop it.

zakisrage August 5th, 2016 11:33 AM

Technically, the Gadsden flag was originally employed by Patriots during the American Revolution, so if it's racist against anyone, it's against the British. I wouldn't consider it in the same league as the Confederate flag.

Arsenic August 5th, 2016 12:23 PM

The world needs to toughen up. No wonder humanity is useless. People like this guy are a prime symbol of this.

Put him on a rocket with every whining person out there and shoot them into space, with or without food.

Really though I'm sick of this stuff. "I'm going to sue the coffee store because the cup didn't say it was hot!!!" Really? I'm going to sue your face! With a baseball bat. Repeatedly. I cannot think of any other way to toughen people like that up.

Melody August 5th, 2016 3:28 PM

This flag is a symbol of American Pride. It does not exclude or preclude anyone based on race, creed, color, religion or anything else other than being someone who is an American. You don't even have to be a card carrying citizen to be American. Just have actually moved here, and live here.

It is a historical flag as well. I see absolutely no problems with this flag on this front. Anyone proclaiming this flag to be racially insensitive is misinformed.

Aliencommander1245 August 5th, 2016 3:44 PM

I really reject the idea there's a whine culture going on with this generation because any argument usually ignores the true issues in the example (i.e "lol banning hot coffee?? wow what babies" vs it being so hot it scalded and burnt the skin of a woman being way above what is safe)

CoffeeDrink August 5th, 2016 9:15 PM

The hot coffee lawsuit wasn't a frivolous lawsuit. If you look at it in depth, all the rumours and gossip about it is mostly untrue and I urge anyone who is interested in the case to research it.

0 August 5th, 2016 9:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CoffeeDrink (Post 9354291)
The hot coffee lawsuit wasn't a frivolous lawsuit. If you look at it in depth, all the rumours and gossip about it is mostly untrue and I urge anyone who is interested in the case to research it.

I have to say I agree on this. I just looked a bit at it and I actually got some knowledge on it. It wasn't frivolous, and I don't think it was her fault as much as the company's.




To Alien, whine and moan do exist, and it happens all the time. There are people who think that genders are really so important and complain when people don't agree with them. There are people who whine at every single black killing because it's racist. There are people who complain about the weather.


To say that people don't moan is incorrect.

Her August 6th, 2016 1:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aliencommander1245 (Post 9353864)
I really reject the idea there's a whine culture going on with this generation because any argument usually ignores the true issues in the example (i.e "lol banning hot coffee?? wow what babies" vs it being so hot it scalded and burnt the skin of a woman being way above what is safe)

It tends to come off as an attempt at derailing, more than any sort of valid criticism. Regardless of the intentions of the person propagating the idea of 'Whine Culture', the argument is often very flippant and it just doesn't do much to further the discussion. That's not to say that some examples aren't relevant or based in truth (because saying otherwise would be woefully naive), but the argument itself errs closer to Daily Mailesque baiting than genuine, y'know, debate. It's a bit... disappointing.

In regards to this case itself, I agree with the general sentiment that the flag is just a symbol not worthy of any sort of regulation. A racist identifying with the (now conservative) concept/symbol is not equal to it being an explicit symbol of racism or upholding oppressive systems/beliefs. Not that I really feel strongly either way about this - I'd love to hear strong arguments from both camps, out of my own interest.

Desert Stream~ August 6th, 2016 4:42 AM

So animals are racist now? What's next, food? This is ridiculous O_o

Pinkie-Dawn August 6th, 2016 7:08 AM

Walt Disney, H.P. Lovecraft, and Henry Ford were racists, does that mean we should remove all of their products for "racial harassment?" Founders of pre-mid 20th century companies and groups were racist towards at least one particular group. Doesn't mean that their products are racist themselves.

Desert Stream~ August 7th, 2016 8:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aliencommander1245 (Post 9353864)
I really reject the idea there's a whine culture going on with this generation because any argument usually ignores the true issues in the example (i.e "lol banning hot coffee?? wow what babies" vs it being so hot it scalded and burnt the skin of a woman being way above what is safe)

There's a thing called common sense, humanity should try it.
If you order an iced coffee, and they don't put ice and it burns you that's their fault.
If you cannot understand that a drink prepared in a machine that heats things will be hot, that's the persons fault.

CoffeeDrink August 7th, 2016 9:24 PM

I feel that the 'safe space' phenomenon is a big part of the issue. People go to college to get a degree and they pay to do so. Colleges are a supplier of a certain demand. They are companies, and companies as a rule make money by providing goods and services. If there is a demand for people to hear about the great 'injustices' that are being done to them and everyone else they will buy into it. The problem is that many of their arguments have no basis whatsoever. Why? Because their arguments aren't fact based, but based in feelings and emotions (to the dark side, that path leads).

Our colleges have provided courses that, I believe, counter intuitive and damaging to our intelligence as a whole.

We have people going on the news wanting everything to be paid for by the rich.

We have people ignoring actual facts, that have been compiled over decades of research that prove a systematic point, and stating that we aren't 'looking at the facts'

We have people that are upset about Christians not making gay cakes, but completely ignore the fact that Muslims do the same exact thing.

We have people who have no idea what expectancy of privacy means.

Women who are completely intolerant of men.

Women who want fat mannequins because they aren't skinny, even though the data shows that the 'be yourself, you're beautiful' propaganda does the exact opposite of what it tries to prevent.

People who come crying to the UN about how the Internet is full of jerks and harassment online, while not noticing the UN has much, much bigger fish to fry than how some privileged Americans had their feelings hurt on the internet.

Rioters smashing car windows, small businesses, burning cars and looting.

People shouting death to cops in the street because another felon was shot and killed (the most widely used weapon in homicides are blunt weapons, and of which hands and feet are pinnacle)

Black people who want to completely dissolve the entire policing system, putting millions of cops out of work, Damaging the safety of this country and threatening the lives of every single American (the annual purge will now commence)

We watch people get beat down by the promoters of the 'safe space' all because they disagree.

People that want their birth control paid by you and I, and then scream at the government for interfering with their free birth control drugs that are paid for by the government.

People who truly believe that women pay more for everything. Everything. Not one or two things. Everything. Let that sink in.

People that believe there are more than 33 individual genders.

Women that scream misogyny at men that try to cover their daughters up so they don't look like a spanking, but on the same token, they scream racism at those that criticize the Islamic faith and how it treats women.

There was a woman that wanted to end academic freedom (Harvard graduate) because it hurts people's feelings.

Another where people want to get A's simply because they "try really hard"

News anchors that spit in other people's faces for disagreeing with them.

People that state their own facts without ever looking up the real facts.

The list goes on and on and on. When people point out that "oh, that's just a small minority" they don't take into account of their double standard bullshit. They can't seem to draw the difference between their movement's 'bad apples' and the vast majority of what their group believes. I hate the hypocrisy they spew. These people want to take away your freedom. They want you to lose your job if you misstep. They want the children to always go with the mother regardless if she's a cracked out drug addict or not.

I have to say that it is not a small minority of their group that spews toxic sludge from their pie hole, but the majority of them.

Aliencommander1245 August 7th, 2016 11:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pinkie-Dawn (Post 9354836)
Walt Disney, H.P. Lovecraft, and Henry Ford were racists, does that mean we should remove all of their products for "racial harassment?" Founders of pre-mid 20th century companies and groups were racist towards at least one particular group. Doesn't mean that their products are racist themselves.

You're right, but i think you used some pretty poor examples? Isn't some of lovecraft's work actually filled with racist things? I think they're removed in most modern editions. There's also those few racist disney cartoons/productions that've similarly been redacted/apologised for by Disney itself.

Off on an aside to coffeedrink that's probably not really relevant:

Safe spaces are... literally just places explicitly forbidding people within them from being racist/bigoted or whatever? The sensationalism around that idea is insane

"Everything should be paid for by the rich" vs "the rich do not pay their fare share and are unduly given tax cuts ect as they have political power from their wealth and strongarm policies into favouring the wealthy"

Christians running bakeries not making gay (wedding) cakes despite doing it for straight couples (And dog weddings, usually) opposed to... muslims not making gay cakes? I don't think there's anywhere near as many muslim cake shops nor is anyone claiming that it's somehow ok for muslim people to be homophobic and refuse service (usually illegally in the case of cake makers, depending on their state discrimination laws) while it's not for christians. That's just a weird straw man argument

People talking about online harassment to the UN, wanting plus size mannequins, the news anchors spitting on people(??????) and saying women pay more for every product are... not thing's i've heard about and as such probably nonsense one offs you've seen somewhere rather than legitimate ongoing issues or anything

Weird exaggeration on black lives matter ect aside i don't really see the relevance there

I don't really see why wanting birth control to be covered under medical expenses and also not wanting the birth control cover policies to be tampered with are bad things nor opposite in anyway but hey, alright

I have to ask though, if it's the majority doing these things/trying to do these things.... why aren't they happening? Why aren't people not being homophobic, why aren't women legally above men, why isn't this weird idea of a hyper liberal agenda just completely integrated with society of it's the opinion of the majority and you're the sole bastion of intellectual sense in this crazy messed up world?

Esper August 8th, 2016 11:01 AM

I think the most interesting thing about this is the reaction people are having. All the angry tangents, vague threats, and pearl-clutching about the dangers of liberal communism (or whatever) make me feel like there really is a current of violence associated with this flag and that maybe objections to it are justified.

Somewhere_ August 8th, 2016 7:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Esper (Post 9358376)
I think the most interesting thing about this is the reaction people are having. All the angry tangents, vague threats, and pearl-clutching about the dangers of liberal communism (or whatever) make me feel like there really is a current of violence associated with this flag and that maybe objections to it are justified.

Im pretty well-versed in the right-wing community (having been a part of various different right-wing ideologies and groups, and keeping up with everything). Most "threats" are jokes (ex: Pinochet and helicopter rides, where he threw commies and political opponents- leftists- out of helicopters).

Four primary groups use the flag: Minarchist Libertarians (Non-Aggression Principle-abiding libertines), Rothbardian Anarcho-Capitalists, Alternative-right (broad group), and Tea Partiers. The minarchists, rothbardians, and tea partiers dont really hold a hatred for the left.

Most in the Alt-Right dont use the Gadsden anyways. The minority is irrelevant to even talk about (they aren't violent, but a VERY opposed to the left), but regardless, nothing here is racially charged.


On a side note, most hardcore communists dislike liberals (dont want to speak for them, but whatever). Idk why anyone would call liberals communists, and if one does, he is an idiot (unless referencing specific periods of time, but in a modern context, no).

Hands August 10th, 2016 11:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aliencommander1245 (Post 9352929)
It seems as though it was just a case of racial harassment where the perpetrator was wearing that symbol rather than a case of the symbol meaning anything similar on a broad scale

It's different to the confederate flag, something that is very intrinsically intertwined with racial issues, but as it seems to have come into contemporary use as a "conservative symbol" though it's use by the Tea Party that does sort of lump racist people under the banner it is symbolic for with that use

Overall i don't think it should be banned or restricted as it's not really a symbol that's used for racism/racist causes

Yeah this is what I was gonna touch up on. The flag itself is fine, it just seems like its been decontextualised by the actions of a bad egg.

Its not like its the Stars n Bars which is synonymous with racism, the Gadsden flag seems more of a stand against the British Empire from where I'm standing.

The Gunney August 12th, 2016 7:58 PM

Has banning symbols really accomplished anything? Banning objects and items seems to have the opposite (Prohibition of Alcohol) or no discernible effect (1994 AWB). Why are we pandering to these individuals? and most importantly why are these claims not laughed out of court? You don't have a right not to be offended. The fact that hate groups like the KKK and The New Black Panther Party can rally and spew their virtol is due to a thing called the 1st amendment. This issue like it or not is covered under that right.

Aliencommander1245 August 12th, 2016 9:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Gunney (Post 9365640)
Has banning symbols really accomplished anything? Banning objects and items seems to have the opposite (Prohibition of Alcohol) or no discernible effect (1994 AWB). Why are we pandering to these individuals? and most importantly why are these claims not laughed out of court? You don't have a right not to be offended. The fact that hate groups like the KKK and The New Black Panther Party can rally and spew their virtol is due to a thing called the 1st amendment. This issue like it or not is covered under that right.

In the USA you're (Mostly, i'm pretty sure some individual states do have anti-hate speech laws) right, most other western countries however have provisions to ensure hate speech isn't covered by free speech laws and as such don't have organisations like the ones listed.

Why shouldn't we "pander" to things like this though if there's a legitimate symbol in play though? Should we pretend icons like the swastika and confederate flag don't carry negative/hateful overtones?

Kanzler August 12th, 2016 9:57 PM

Gadsen Flag = Freedom from Brits. That is what the flag means to Americans. That is what it has meant for over two hundred years. When you consider the symbolic meaning of something, you have to consider the entire context. If I attack the American embassy and murder a number of Americans under the Canadian flag, that doesn't make the Canadian flag offensive to Americans because it's an incident underneath a backdrop of historic symbolic meaning.

Quote:

Complainant stated that he found the cap to be racially offensive to African Americans because the flag was designed by Christopher Gadsden, a “slave trader & owner of slaves.”
By that logic, the Constitution of the United States should be racially offensive to African Americans, since it was drafted in part by slaveholders - wait, maybe then it's only partially racially offensive then.

The Gunney August 13th, 2016 3:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aliencommander1245 (Post 9365725)
In the USA you're (Mostly, i'm pretty sure some individual states do have anti-hate speech laws) right, most other western countries however have provisions to ensure hate speech isn't covered by free speech laws and as such don't have organisations like the ones listed.

Why shouldn't we "pander" to things like this though if there's a legitimate symbol in play though? Should we pretend icons like the swastika and confederate flag don't carry negative/hateful overtones?

The meaning behind symbols can and do change for example the swastika was at one time a symbol for happiness or peace until it became a symbol of Nazism. and the Confederate Flag was a battle flag for a Northern Virginia formation. The ambiguity of hate speech laws make them dangerous due to the ambiguity of language and symbolism itself.
I do not support government action based on such shaky legal grounds due the fertile ground for abuse. If an idea cannot compete in the free marketplace of ideas such as the ones presented by the KKK and BLM under such laws like we have in the U.S. the idea is largely rejected until better evidence for it is presented. As I have stated You Do Not Have a Right to Not Be Offended. The day that becomes a right is the day free speech dies.

Aliencommander1245 August 13th, 2016 6:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Gunney (Post 9365924)
The meaning behind symbols can and do change for example the swastika was at one time a symbol for happiness or peace until it became a symbol of Nazism. and the Confederate Flag was a battle flag for a Northern Virginia formation.

Yes, that is true? Symbols don't just form out of thin air with the negative meaning behind them already there, they're twisted and used in such a way to create that. How does that de-legitimise their current meaning? Are you saying we shouldn't take offensive/negatively charged material as being that because at any time it could have the meaning overridden by something postiive? Because that's... not really how things work?

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Gunney (Post 9365924)
The ambiguity of hate speech laws make them dangerous due to the ambiguity of language and symbolism itself.

Not particularly, they're lined out very clearly in countries that do have them and are only ""dangerous"" to people who are, quite frankly, just bigoted or whatever. "Why can't i use racially charged insults to demean people?" "Why can't demean and deride people for their secuality or religion? Isnt this a FREE country?!" is an undefend-able stance and not really anything worth debating.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Gunney (Post 9365924)
I do not support government action based on such shaky legal grounds due the fertile ground for abuse.

I'd like to have an example of this abuse sort of thing

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Gunney (Post 9365924)
If an idea cannot compete in the free marketplace of ideas such as the ones presented by the KKK and BLM under such laws like we have in the U.S. the idea is largely rejected until better evidence for it is presented.

The idea of a "free marketplace of ideas" relies heavily on the concept that the truth is valued above all else on a level playingfield. This is simply not true. Mainstay public opinion is hardly based on what's the most factual idea around and is in fact based entirely on what's popular. This is... completely unrelated to the concept of offensive language, symbols and stereotypes though so i'm not sure why you brought it up?

The idea that people won't say racist things because they're not true is baffling to me, considering the current political situation in the US right now being the antithesis of that

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Gunney (Post 9365924)
As I have stated You Do Not Have a Right to Not Be Offended. The day that becomes a right is the day free speech dies.

Well, free speech seems to be dead in most of the western world and we're all fine thusfar? That American-centric view of "free speech" you have just doesn't hold up with the rest of the world.

A better question, really, is Why Do You Think You Deserve To Have The Right To Offend People? what possible positive things come of being bigoted or just a straight up jerk? How does being a bad person in that way contribute to society in any way?

How does being divisive for no real reason other than a self entailed idea that you should be able to, help a unified society? What purpose does it serve?


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:51 AM.


Like our Facebook Page Follow us on Twitter © 2002 - 2018 The PokéCommunity™, pokecommunity.com.
Pokémon characters and images belong to The Pokémon Company International and Nintendo. This website is in no way affiliated with or endorsed by Nintendo, Creatures, GAMEFREAK, The Pokémon Company or The Pokémon Company International. We just love Pokémon.
All forum styles, their images (unless noted otherwise) and site designs are © 2002 - 2016 The PokéCommunity / PokéCommunity.com.
PokéCommunity™ is a trademark of The PokéCommunity. All rights reserved. Sponsor advertisements do not imply our endorsement of that product or service. User generated content remains the property of its creator.

Acknowledgements
Use of PokéCommunity Assets
vB Optimise by DragonByte Technologies Ltd © 2023.