I didn't see the threads from earlier to which Eric was referring in his pinned post.
However I was surprised that the Master List of Offensive Items thread survived last week. Granted, that one didn't turn into a complete mess the way these threads tend to go.
Talking about whether or not the Betsy Ross flag is an offensive symbol now, and what is happening at the border was ok.
And I assume anything about specific political persons, or parties is off limits.
That leads me to my question posed in the title.
Where exactly is the line drawn?
Maybe someday we will live in the Utopian world of a BBI with clear rules applied equally (which in the efforts of not having this post deleted I will say is incredibly hard to do) and a Giants management structure not intent on being behind the times.
Yes, which is why I was surprised the thread I have been discussing survived.
Either the rule is very clear and says anything even remotely political is off limits, which is what I thought it was. Or we have some gray area where slightly different rules apply. I am happy with either. I just think it should be clear, for the benefit of everybody.
Quote:
In comment 14497493 Tesla said:
Quote:
not really one country any more....we are two divided nations being forced to live together. What the hell does some professional in NYC have in common with someone who lives in rural Mississippi? Forget belonging to the same political party, we don't read the same news, watch the same shows, enjoy the same actives or share any common values. The NYC person has far more in common with someone who lives in London than Alabama.
America is basically like a couple in a bad marriage who refuses to get divorced because neither wants to give the house to the other one.
That's a crock. We've been fighting with one another since before we were even a country. The game hasn't changed, only the players and the equipment have.
Why is what Tesla said a crock... And you are right we have been fighting since before we were a country. I don't see the 2 points as mutually exclusive. In fact, many of the central themes of the fight, have been roughly the same for over 250 years.
Because the key word in his first sentence is "now," as if we were all in agreement about everything until recently, which is simply not true. There have always been regional and cultural variations among our people that have been reflected in our politics. About 150 years ago, one was so great it almost tore us completely apart. Some people say we're on the verge of a second Civil War. I say, man, we're not even close.
What Tesla sees as things that divide us, I see as things that have always been there in one form or another, but are largely irrelevant. Where we may live, what food we may enjoy, what books we read, what TV shows and movies we watch, or what values we hold dear don't define us as a nation. What does is the adherence to the rule of law, to the precepts set forth in our founding document, the Declaration of Independence, and our governing document, the Constitution. That's what keeps this country together.
Tesla used a couple in a bad marriage as an analogy. Well, anyone who's been married knows that it's not all rainbows and sunshine. Every marriage has it's ups and downs, it's good times and bad times. America has certainly had it's share of both. But it's not staying together out of spite. It might be staying together "for the sake of the children," but I prefer to think that it's staying together because it believes that in the final analysis it's simply better off that way. I reject any notion that this country is broken beyond repair.
I also reject any notion that the problems we face today are any more insurmountable than those we've faced in the past. Sure, sometimes it might seem that way, but even a cursory examination of our history would dispel that notion. As I said above, we're still playing the same game.
I would appreciate no personal political ideologies, or policies in this thread. This is *NOT* a political thread, let's keep it that way.
Go find a safe space...
greatest nation in history.
In BBI's past we have had "Banning without explanation".
Is this really a thing of the past?
Or is the Pronunciamento considered to be a pre-explanation
of banning?
By the way, is the use of the old nickname "Lefty" a
bannable offense?
Quote:
In comment 14497550 Klaatu said:
Quote:
In comment 14497493 Tesla said:
Quote:
not really one country any more....we are two divided nations being forced to live together. What the hell does some professional in NYC have in common with someone who lives in rural Mississippi? Forget belonging to the same political party, we don't read the same news, watch the same shows, enjoy the same actives or share any common values. The NYC person has far more in common with someone who lives in London than Alabama.
America is basically like a couple in a bad marriage who refuses to get divorced because neither wants to give the house to the other one.
That's a crock. We've been fighting with one another since before we were even a country. The game hasn't changed, only the players and the equipment have.
Why is what Tesla said a crock... And you are right we have been fighting since before we were a country. I don't see the 2 points as mutually exclusive. In fact, many of the central themes of the fight, have been roughly the same for over 250 years.
Because the key word in his first sentence is "now," as if we were all in agreement about everything until recently, which is simply not true. There have always been regional and cultural variations among our people that have been reflected in our politics. About 150 years ago, one was so great it almost tore us completely apart. Some people say we're on the verge of a second Civil War. I say, man, we're not even close.
What Tesla sees as things that divide us, I see as things that have always been there in one form or another, but are largely irrelevant. Where we may live, what food we may enjoy, what books we read, what TV shows and movies we watch, or what values we hold dear don't define us as a nation. What does is the adherence to the rule of law, to the precepts set forth in our founding document, the Declaration of Independence, and our governing document, the Constitution. That's what keeps this country together.
Tesla used a couple in a bad marriage as an analogy. Well, anyone who's been married knows that it's not all rainbows and sunshine. Every marriage has it's ups and downs, it's good times and bad times. America has certainly had it's share of both. But it's not staying together out of spite. It might be staying together "for the sake of the children," but I prefer to think that it's staying together because it believes that in the final analysis it's simply better off that way. I reject any notion that this country is broken beyond repair.
I also reject any notion that the problems we face today are any more insurmountable than those we've faced in the past. Sure, sometimes it might seem that way, but even a cursory examination of our history would dispel that notion. As I said above, we're still playing the same game.
Excellent points.
I agree with you that many of the things that Tesla mentioned are superficial and don't matter.
Unfortunately, I think that when the 2 sides read the declaration of independence and the constitution it seems that they come away with very different POVs, and very different values. To keep with the bad marriage analogy, call it irreconcilable differences. Given enough time, perhaps a generation or 2, those difference can probably be resolved. I don't think the current generation can resolve it. Unfortunately, the problems we have today are more and more global in nature, many of them existential, and the pace of everything is speeding up. I'm not so sure we have the luxury of time to resolve our differences anymore. Certainly dividing us into 2 separate nations is not the answer. But it certainly feels like a bad marriage.
America is basically like a couple in a bad marriage who refuses to get divorced because neither wants to give the house to the other one.
the last time we went the divorce route 750,000 people died.
You are hereby banned from the cooking threads
😳
because the word has gotten out about you?
What the fuck does the Giants management structure have to do here?
Excellent points.
I agree with you that many of the things that Tesla mentioned are superficial and don't matter.
Unfortunately, I think that when the 2 sides read the declaration of independence and the constitution it seems that they come away with very different POVs, and very different values. To keep with the bad marriage analogy, call it irreconcilable differences. Given enough time, perhaps a generation or 2, those difference can probably be resolved. I don't think the current generation can resolve it. Unfortunately, the problems we have today are more and more global in nature, many of them existential, and the pace of everything is speeding up. I'm not so sure we have the luxury of time to resolve our differences anymore. Certainly dividing us into 2 separate nations is not the answer. But it certainly feels like a bad marriage.
Those different POV's and values have been around for 100+ years, ever since the birth of the modern Progressive movement and the idea of a "living" Constitution (championed most notably by Woodrow Wilson). Before that, the Populist movement pitted farmers against "Eastern moneyed interests," and for a time seemed to wield considerable political power, but fizzled out rather quickly for a variety of reasons.
The struggle was just as real then as it is now, and we've always had groups like the Mugwumps, switching party allegiance for one reason or another. Are those Obama voters who might have supported Bernie Sanders, but voted for Trump instead of Hillary Clinton any different than the Republicans who refused to support James G. Blaine and voted for Grover Cleveland instead? I really don't think so.
Throughout our history, many of our problems have been global in nature. Foreign intervention has been hotly debated for more than a century, as one "crisis" after another - manufactured or otherwise - has reared its ugly head. But the next time you hear any talking head on any network beating the war drums, think about the artist Frederic Remington being sent to Cuba by William Randolph Hearst prior to the Spanish-American War. Remington cabled Hearst telling him that all was quiet there, and that "there will be no war." Hearst cabled back, "You furnish the pictures. I'll furnish the war." Some things never change.
I think a faster pace in terms of the flow of information is a net positive, even though the information can be misused or perverted at times. I like the way the "town square" has expanded. I like the immediacy. I like the new breed of "citizen journalists" inhabiting all points on the political spectrum. Do biases exist? Of course. They always have. But the rise of major networks and the consolidation of local and regional newspapers under increasingly large corporate umbrellas tended to enforce conformity, especially the conformity of ideas. The Internet changed all that. September 2004 was a seminal moment. A blogger took on CBS and Dan Rather and won.
Regarding the luxury of time. We still have it, in my view. The perception may be that it's running out, but I think that's fueled by a false sense of urgency promoted by a small, but very vocal cadre of demagogues who prefer sloganeering to sober debate. The Founders purposely set up a system that moved slowly, that diffused power, that encouraged debate and pushed for consensus. It isn't perfect, but it's still "more perfect" than anything that came before or has come since, and it certainly shouldn't be dismissed in the name of expediency.
Finally, other than nuclear annihilation, I think the only real existential thread we face is straying too far from the path laid out by the Founders. By that I mean we're in danger of having the Federal Republic they created morph into a judicial oligarchy. I think that's been trending for the past 40+ years or so, and I find it very worrisome. The consolidation of power by what was supposed to be the weakest branch of government, the one least accountable to the people, should give everyone pause. Unchecked, it may not lead to "divorce," but it will most likely bring about an end to whatever harmony still exists among all members of the family.
I would add as existential threats the very poorly controlled global and US financial system, the lower and lower efficacy of the traditional levers to pull out of a financial crisis ( other than print which is socially destabilizing) and income inequality when the next downturn comes ( which is socially destabilizing).
To me the judicial swings occur every 30 to 40 years since the beginning so I don't see that one as destabilizing as the ones above.
This period is like the others in our history when there was not a significant multi decade source of real growth from productivity gains from an energy, transport, or communication or CS source.
( canals linking water sources in the 1820's, railroads from 1830 to 1880, steam/coal to gas, electrical miniturization, etc.
Quote:
not really one country any more....we are two divided nations being forced to live together. What the hell does some professional in NYC have in common with someone who lives in rural Mississippi? Forget belonging to the same political party, we don't read the same news, watch the same shows, enjoy the same actives or share any common values. The NYC person has far more in common with someone who lives in London than Alabama.
America is basically like a couple in a bad marriage who refuses to get divorced because neither wants to give the house to the other one.
That's a crock. We've been fighting with one another since before we were even a country. The game hasn't changed, only the players and the equipment have.
.