Coke creates advert that causes conservatives to go nuts

[Slowvehicle]

Big smiles!!

Love that part of the state and visit as often as possible.

I knew an elderly man there who could not keep a conversation in English if he tried. Born and raised in the Hill Country, his parents spoke German and the people who worked for him spoke Spanish, so while he spoke English fine, he wandered in and out of the other two quite often.

I think it hurt my head more than others because I knew a few words in German and had taken Spanish in school, so I was actively trying to follow him when everyone else just tuned him out.

He was more American than apple pie and baseball combined.

 

[Border Reiver]

Dear Reiver,



I don't know what the difference is, if one sees a good thing one is always fearful that it might come to harm or an end (unless God, I suppose, though Christ proves that even God can meet a bad end, at least on the surface).



That English, which I'm fond of, isn't losing its hegemony in the US or the rest of the English-speaking world very quickly, is, I think, a good thing.



Cpl Ferro

Why is it a good thing?

Would the US Constitution cease to exist if the dominant language became Spanish, or would Spanish speaking Americans treasure it as much as English speaking Americans do?

 

[Foolmewunz]

In the country of the mad, the sane man is called mad, dudalb.

Cpl Ferro

Similarly, though, in the country of the sane, the mad man is called mad. It's up to discerning readers and thinkers to figure out which one LaRouche is... ETA: Which of those categories or "countries" is the origin of the criticism of LaRouche. It would seem to be a win/win. Sane people consider him mad. Mad people consider him mad.

This is becoming known as The Amazing Conundrum, based on Randi's oft-cited statement to the effect of "Sure, they laughed at Galileo. They also laughed at Bozo the Clown." The fact that LaRouche is reviled and ridiculed does not automatically place him up there with Galileo, in other words.

 

[CplFerro]

Similarly, though, in the country of the sane, the mad man is called mad. It's up to discerning readers and thinkers to figure out which one LaRouche is... ETA: Which of those categories or "countries" is the origin of the criticism of LaRouche. It would seem to be a win/win. Sane people consider him mad. Mad people consider him mad.

This is becoming known as The Amazing Conundrum, based on Randi's oft-cited statement to the effect of "Sure, they laughed at Galileo. They also laughed at Bozo the Clown." The fact that LaRouche is reviled and ridiculed does not automatically place him up there with Galileo, in other words.

Reviled even? Jesus! Contempt before investigation, Foolmewunz. All of you, to a man, are ignorant of his ideas.

Cpl Ferro

 

[CplFerro]

Why is it a good thing?

Would the US Constitution cease to exist if the dominant language became Spanish, or would Spanish speaking Americans treasure it as much as English speaking Americans do?

They might Reiver, but the English speakers would be irritated and dismayed as their linguistic tradition fades away. It's a fine thing to know that one lives in a country where one can talk with anyone in it. It's an unpleasant thing to know that one's "countrymen" can't all speak with you.

Cpl Ferro

 

[Garrison]

When I saw the title of the thread I thought they had found out about the UK ad with the gay marriage....

 

[Giordano]

They might Reiver, but the English speakers would be irritated and dismayed as their linguistic tradition fades away. It's a fine thing to know that one lives in a country where one can talk with anyone in it. It's an unpleasant thing to know that one's "countrymen" can't all speak with you.

Cpl Ferro

Learn another language. That will not only solve your problem, but allow you to speak to people in other countries. Many people on this planet have done so.

 

[Slowvehicle]

They might Reiver, but the English speakers would be irritated and dismayed as their linguistic tradition fades away. It's a fine thing to know that one lives in a country where one can talk with anyone in it. It's an unpleasant thing to know that one's "countrymen" can't all speak with you.

Cpl Ferro

You keep ignoring the fact that the English language is the interloper, here--by your lights we should all be speaking Spanish. Or German. Or Spanish and German. And Russian, and Japanese, and French, and Diné bizaad (or some Athabaskan creole), and...well, you (should) get the point.

Don't worry, though. We autochtonic Hispanohablantes have figured out that gringos will, eventually, get it, if we just speak loudly and slowly, and over-enunciate...

 

[Dr. Keith]

Dear Dr.,

Well, we start from the idea of what people are, which is humans made, as it were, in the image of the Creativity of the universe.

I don't like that idea, in fact I reject it. We are a part of the universe, but so is a slug and a shrimp, and butter, and garlic. But I digest . . .

Call that God or not, doesn't really matter, the universe creates things--planets, frogs, rainbows--and we can create things, too.

But you would have us only create the same things over and over. I think we need to create different things, constantly and should build on our prior creations, not worship them.

This is the basis for our value as a species, that is, that our identity as creative individuals best affords us the good life, which corresponds with the survival of our species and the concomitant technological transformation of the biosphere and the rest of the universe immediately accessible to us for the time being.

Assumes we have a value. I'm not there yet.

From this perspective, the highest or most important thing to preserve is a healthy linguistic tradition, which means a well-stocked language (metaphors, words) and a literate population capable of reading the classics of its own tradition, and the translated works of others.

But you just said creativity was the basis of our value, not preservation. You can't even agree with yourself. Preservation is only important to the extent that it informs creativity, at the point where preservation overrides creativity it is worthless, stifling, and will lead to the death of civilization. Or a really bland tossed salad with ranch dressing. Not sure which is worse.

It can, I admit, help to learn other languages; translation helps broaden the mind; but it also helps to have everyone in the country speaking the same language, so that everyone can be included in the national dialogue.

This makes no sense whatever as a diversity of languages will assist in communication, not hamper it. The Tower of Babel was a fable trying to explain a poorly understood condition that existed in the world, not a scientific study of communication in the workplace.

Most polite people will dislike talk of racial preservation, you probably are, and LaRouche is adamantly against it, but, some people still care about it, unconsciously, preconsciously or consciously. A given race is preserved by the expedient of industrialising and otherwise developing the countries from whom the cream of their populations are being skimmed by emigration. That is, if we would rather not be inundated by people of alien races, changing the racial stock of the nation, the humane solution—indeed, the solution mandated whether or not anyone cares about race--is to help make where they came from worth living in, since people most often emigrate due to lack of opportunities, and the presence of some kind of national strife that makes life there unpleasant. The fact that people are immigrating to the European-predominant parts of the world indicates a profound immorality embedded in the world system of political economy.

I'm sure you are not nearly as racist as this sounds.

Religion, I would recommend recognising that Christianity is one of the three essential developments that lead to modern Western civilisation (the other two being the Renaissance and Classical Greece).

I would recommend reevaluating that assumption based on factual evidence. There are threads here to help you.

Making it the official religion would help, I think. Not the state religion in the sense of being compulsory, but official in the sense that its foundational importance to Western civ is recognised and its tenets should be taught in schools, its holidays are the basis for official holidays, and the like. This may make some people grumpy. I'm prepared for grumpiness if it means maintaining the traditional and Classical value that Christianity has for our society. I'm not perfectly convinced of this, but there you have it.

It is an awful idea in every conceivable way. Please think more about it before you decide.

Culturally, the matter is more difficult. As dudalb astutely pointed out, I am a follower of Lyndon LaRouche, who has no time of day to give to popular culture or distinctly national culture which doesn't have anything to do with Classical art. This all he shoves into the drawer labelled “counterculture” before proceeding to close and lock it. I grasp the danger counterculture has: it's addictive and distracting and a personality marinating in it can lose the capacity for appreciating Classical beauty. In fact, this is where I want to emphasise that the political situation being sought, by myself and by my fellow LaRoucheans, orbits Beauty. So in dealing with counterculture, which is perpetually changing and increasing, the question is how can Beauty be derived from it. I'll give one example: abolish the “intellectual property” laws that prevent Classical composers from using elements of what amounts now to peasant music, counterculture. I don't know if that's a feasible or even more than a token step towards both preserving national culture, but it's an idea.

I am an IP attorney and I can tell you flatly that there is no IP law in the western world that prevents "Classical composers" from learning from and incorporating inspiration from modern music. Copyright will prevent direct copying, but not inspiration. If it did, there would be no modern music.

More importantly, all that you elevate as Classical Art was at one time "counterculture" - that is the natural progression of the arts. What you are seeing now, will some day be classical. As we now consider Frank Sinatra a classic, our children will some day refer to Madonna.

I hope this answers your question.

Cpl Ferro

Only that it appears that you have not thought much about the consequences of what you desire. You love art that required the fertile ground of innovation to be produced, but now you wish to remove the fertilizer and create copies of that which you revere. If you can't see the folly in that, I can't help you.

 

[Morrigan]

In the sense that the French have no word for "entrepreneur"?

Okay, what is the evidence that the French think differently because of the language?

He might have a point if it were a drastically different language, such as Mandarin Chinese or Japanese, as these languages do have words for concepts that don't quite exist as-is in English and vice-versa, but as a native French speaker, I'm extremely amused by the notion that this applies to English vs French.

(I'm less amused by the bigotry, racism, and nauseating Christianity, though. That's just ick.)

 

[Xulld]

Both sides are just reveling in the spectacle. Sad really. One about their own bigotry, and the other over their make believe outrage.

 

[Dr. Keith]

Both sides are just reveling in the spectacle. Sad really. One about their own bigotry, and the other over their make believe outrage.

My outrage at bigotry is hardly make believe. I really find it repulsive. Almost as repulsive as Coke.

 

[Xulld]

My outrage at bigotry is hardly make believe. I really find it repulsive. Almost as repulsive as Coke.

I kind of look at it as par for course. Just as travis knew the second the commercial aired that someone from the neo-cons would get his gall up over it so did I, but I also knew this outrage would make great MSM grist for the mill and shook my head about that as well.

But then again, is there really anything of which that is not true? Lately race, and ethnicity, and heck even language has been the hot button issues, but really that has been true, somewhere on the continuum, for the last 80 years or so.

What is different now is that it is no longer the majority view. So it has been a self correcting movement since the civil rights era, and only getting better.

Let the neo-cons have the rope they need to hang themselves, but lets not get more worked up than this warrants. (IMHO it warrants me electing them out of office on par with the scientifically illiterate politicians.)

I dont know I just do not find it shocking at all, and thus no outrage from me, I just shake my head slowly as I do when watching idiots focus on shallow issues at the expense of real issue each and every single day.

almost as repulsive as coke

. . makes me think I have just been trolled, lol, sure maybe he does not like coke, but is this him joking that this is really not that big of an issue, yet something to make a yuck face over? If so, I agree.

However, I like coke, I mean I only drink about 4-5 soda's of any kind every few months . . . so yea I really do not drink soda for all intents and purposes.

 

[dudalb]

Just have to repeat that expecting anything like logic or common sense from a hardcore Lyndon La Rouch supporter is a exercise in wishful thinking.

 

[Dr. Keith]

I kind of look at it as par for course. Just as travis knew the second the commercial aired that someone from the neo-cons would get his gall up over it so did I, but I also knew this outrage would make great MSM grist for the mill and shook my head about that as well.

But then again, is there really anything of which that is not true? Lately race, and ethnicity, and heck even language has been the hot button issues, but really that has been true, somewhere on the continuum, for the last 80 years or so.

What is different now is that it is no longer the majority view. So it has been a self correcting movement since the civil rights era, and only getting better.

Let the neo-cons have the rope they need to hang themselves, but lets not get more worked up than this warrants. (IMHO it warrants me electing them out of office on par with the scientifically illiterate politicians.)

I dont know I just do not find it shocking at all, and thus no outrage from me, I just shake my head slowly as I do when watching idiots focus on shallow issues at the expense of real issue each and every single day.

Agreed. That's why my posts have not been entirely serious in this thread.

. . makes me think I have just been trolled, lol, sure maybe he does not like coke, but is this him joking that this is really not that big of an issue, yet something to make a yuck face over? If so, I agree.

Not trolled so much as . . . "agreeing covertly", yeah that's it. You read it perfectly, so I feel no shame. Have a good weekend.

 

[Babbylonian]

What is different now is that it is no longer the majority view. So it has been a self correcting movement since the civil rights era, and only getting better.

No, it's not "self correcting." Saying such is insulting to the people who've worked hard, risked much, and even died in their efforts to address the problem of racism.

 

[Xulld]

No, it's not "self correcting." Saying such is insulting to the people who've worked hard, risked much, and even died in their efforts to address the problem of racism.

Fair point, careless use of words. Steady progress would have been a more sensitive and apt choice to make my point.

Do you think this level of false political outrage is productive?

 

[Babbylonian]

Do you think this level of false political outrage is productive?

Which level? How do you determine which outrage is false?

 

[SezMe]

Similarly, how do you differentiate debate and discussion from outrage?

 

[Quinn]

Dear David,

How about, a rate of change that doesn't cause the cultural suite to disintegrate leading to social problems and a sense of malaise in people like myself?

Thank you for at least finally admitting that the crux of your objection to multiculturalism is that simply it makes you and others like you uncomfortable. Now that we've successfully identified the problem, we can start looking at ways to address it.

One is for such people to exert their combined political and popular influence in an attempt (and a pretty clearly doomed one) to try to keep the influence of other cultural elements at bay, thus allowing them to continue shallowly enjoying the false sense of hegemony they've conjured up in their circumscribed world.

Another is for such people to wake up, take a look around them, and realize that their perceived cultural identity has been an illusion based on false premises all along, and that the only way they've managed not to notice sooner was by keeping their heads buried in the sand to a degree which modern communication and connectivity renders effectively impossible.

You can probably guess which one I'm in favor of. I know it's scary, but once you get used to it, it's really not that bad. People who don't look or speak like you are, on the whole, no worse than those who do.