Coronavirus

[stahleyp]

So you're just trolling.

 

Edit: At least Scottie was honest about it.

 

Probably somewhat trolling. I am afraid that liberals are going to ban anything they don't like as "hate speech" though.

As I pointed above, banning flags of traitors and groups that committed atrocities are quite common and not brought to you be raving "libruls".

 

Yes, but that's only because the union won. If the confederacy had won, we would be the "traitors." Indeed, if the Nazis would have won WWII, they would calling our side for the "atrocities" too.

 

Eh thats a bad argument. As you know, a moral compass is not guided by who wins. That said, a flag is a piece of cloth. It means different things to different people. We've seen this in many instances, for a long time. Even down to gangbangers shooting people up over disrespecting their flag/colors. As I mentioned, to many folks in the south, its just a symbol of southern pride.

 

 

What drives a moral compass then if not society? I love the morality question!  ;D

 

 

[cubsfan]

The fake "wokeness" that has so embedded western culture has become unbearable. Everyone is righteous and everyone is sanctimonious and anyone who disagrees or even questions is evil and demonized.

 

 

Dude - you hit the nail on the head! +1

[John Hjorth]

In a way, - I don't know which - the current line of posting in this topic has to stop.

[cubsfan]

Well, back before everything become racist, the confederate flag was often viewed by people as a sign of southern pride. Synonymous with barbecues, whiskey, guns, and country music. Nothing more, nothing less. But again, this is before the dictators in the coastal cities decided they were unbridled endorsements of slavery and sought to both ban the flag, and ruin the lives of anyone who contested their idea of what the flagged represented.

 

Yeah, that is EXACTLY right. This flag was a symbol of Southern pride - EXACTLY. Nothing more. They lost the war, were severely punished

both economically and morally. What more did you need?

 

An unintended consequence was the whole racist thing. You want to ban it - go ahead, but the South was still proud of being the South.

Just like Texans just love the Lone Star Flag as they were a separate country at one time.

 

 

[DooDiligence]

I think everyone here knows I'm a fiscal conservative, but a liberal socialist when it comes to individual rights.

 

But I have to ask my liberal friends, are we going too far in some issues.  Now they are banning "Gone With the Wind".  What's next, "Forrest Gump?"

 

I knew GWTW was racist when I first saw it as a kid, same with Breakfast at Tiffany's, but are we going to outlaw all movies and books with racist connotations?  We would then have to ban books like "To Kill a Mockingbird", which would serve the opposite purpose of the book's moral outrage at racism.

 

Banning confederate flags at Nascar...yes, I think that is very reasonable.  But when you start skewing history and censoring information written in a historical context or period, you are actually moving closer to the direction of Nazi's than away.

 

And you are talking to a Indo-Canadian kid born in Canada, whose family is made up of Hindus, Punjabis, Blacks, Chinese, Vietnamese, Italian and English backgrounds!  Cheers!

 

If we're going to ban confederate flags, you should also ban any other flags that might offend people. It's not right to censor one view just because group X gets offended but allow another flag to go  even though it offends group Y.

That's bullshit. There are plenty of instances of banned flags because of what they represent. Throughout most of the eastern block you cannot display flags with the hammer and sickle for example. In Germany it is illegal to display the Third Reich flag or any nazi symbols. These laws are mainly for a few whackaoos because no organization in their right mind over there would ever display one of these flags or symbols.

 

Keep in mind that these were actually the official country flags for these countries. In some cases for a long period of time and they are banned. The idea of banning the battle flag of a bunch of traitors that started an open insurrection against a country that led to the deadliest war that country has ever experienced isn't that out there.

 

I'm not a fan of the confederate flag but I see no reason why the folks who enjoy that flag should be discriminated against if one is really "tolerant." We're not talking about Germany here. We're talking about the US. Would you be in favor of then, saying banning something like the flag of Japan because we were at war with them at one time and that they bombed Pearl Harbor?

 

Spoken like someone who's never spent any quality time in NW FL or lower AL.

 

It's not a matter of "enjoying" the confederate flag.

It's a symbol of racism & those who fly it are making their feelings known.

If you doubt what I'm saying, I invite you to visit & I'll take you on a tour of our beautiful beaches.

[stahleyp]

I think everyone here knows I'm a fiscal conservative, but a liberal socialist when it comes to individual rights.

 

But I have to ask my liberal friends, are we going too far in some issues.  Now they are banning "Gone With the Wind".  What's next, "Forrest Gump?"

 

I knew GWTW was racist when I first saw it as a kid, same with Breakfast at Tiffany's, but are we going to outlaw all movies and books with racist connotations?  We would then have to ban books like "To Kill a Mockingbird", which would serve the opposite purpose of the book's moral outrage at racism.

 

Banning confederate flags at Nascar...yes, I think that is very reasonable.  But when you start skewing history and censoring information written in a historical context or period, you are actually moving closer to the direction of Nazi's than away.

 

And you are talking to a Indo-Canadian kid born in Canada, whose family is made up of Hindus, Punjabis, Blacks, Chinese, Vietnamese, Italian and English backgrounds!  Cheers!

 

If we're going to ban confederate flags, you should also ban any other flags that might offend people. It's not right to censor one view just because group X gets offended but allow another flag to go  even though it offends group Y.

That's bullshit. There are plenty of instances of banned flags because of what they represent. Throughout most of the eastern block you cannot display flags with the hammer and sickle for example. In Germany it is illegal to display the Third Reich flag or any nazi symbols. These laws are mainly for a few whackaoos because no organization in their right mind over there would ever display one of these flags or symbols.

 

Keep in mind that these were actually the official country flags for these countries. In some cases for a long period of time and they are banned. The idea of banning the battle flag of a bunch of traitors that started an open insurrection against a country that led to the deadliest war that country has ever experienced isn't that out there.

 

I'm not a fan of the confederate flag but I see no reason why the folks who enjoy that flag should be discriminated against if one is really "tolerant." We're not talking about Germany here. We're talking about the US. Would you be in favor of then, saying banning something like the flag of Japan because we were at war with them at one time and that they bombed Pearl Harbor?

 

Spoken like someone who's never spent any quality time in NW FL or lower AL.

 

It's not a matter of "enjoying" the confederate flag.

It's a symbol of racism & those who fly it are making their feelings known.

If you doubt what I'm saying, I invite you to visit & I'll take you on a tour of our beautiful beaches.

 

It's a symbol of racism to you. That doesn't mean they see it way. Why be so intolerant?

[Cigarbutt]

In a way, - I don't know which - the current line of posting in this topic has to stop.

For those interested, here is a distilled list of best-evidence that has built up over the last few weeks versus prevention of transmission.

https://academic.oup.com/jid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/infdis/jiaa189/5820886

https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/publications-data/using-face-masks-community-reducing-covid-19-transmission

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext

 

From a humble perspective, a detached and rational approach tends to avoid running into sterile debates and tribal drift but i often feel like an idiot.

It's fascinating that this virus, which is somewhat benign from an evolutionary standpoint, stirs so much reptilian instincts and one has to wonder about the host (and its institutions).

Maybe i focus too much on governance issues.

[ERICOPOLY]

So you're just trolling.

 

Edit: At least Scottie was honest about it.

 

Probably somewhat trolling. I am afraid that liberals are going to ban anything they don't like as "hate speech" though.

As I pointed above, banning flags of traitors and groups that committed atrocities are quite common and not brought to you be raving "libruls".

 

Yes, but that's only because the union won. If the confederacy had won, we would be the "traitors." Indeed, if the Nazis would have won WWII, they would calling our side for the "atrocities" too.

 

Trump reminded us of what we used to do to traitors in the old days... and now the flag of traitors flies at his rallies.

 

[mcliu]

The fake "wokeness" that has so embedded western culture has become unbearable. Everyone is righteous and everyone is sanctimonious and anyone who disagrees or even questions is evil and demonized.

 

 

Dude - you hit the nail on the head! +1

 

Especially all the fake woke corporations, celebrities and basketball players.

[RichardGibbons]

Eh thats a bad argument. As you know, a moral compass is not guided by who wins. That said, a flag is a piece of cloth. It means different things to different people. We've seen this in many instances, for a long time. Even down to gangbangers shooting people up over disrespecting their flag/colors. As I mentioned, to many folks in the south, its just a symbol of southern pride.

 

That's interesting. I think this is the first time I've "met" someone who thinks it's fine to fly both the ISIS flag and the Nazi flag.

[RichardGibbons]

Most of the things are not hard. How hard is it to put on a mask? Is it done?

Lockdown is very hard on many people.  It is one thing to say open your shop and have good ventilation.  Another to say shut your shop and sit at home.

 

So, are you "pro-mask" then? You seem to change the subject whenever anyone mentions masks.

 

IMO, shutting down was a no-brainer at the start, and now opening shops while requiring masks in public enclosed spaces (and ideally good ventilation) is also a no brainer.

[cwericb]

"IMO, shutting down was a no-brainer at the start, and now opening shops while requiring masks in public enclosed spaces (and ideally good ventilation) is also a no brainer. "

 

Agreed. You have to wonder about anyone who is against wearing a mask in public. Wearing masks help protect yourself, but more so it protects others if you should have the virus. At some point it will become evident that not wearing a mask is insulting to those you meet. I know of some countries where this is already the case and those not wearing masks may be met with some hostility.

[cubsfan]

 

Good to see this. Will be great for America.

 

https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/coronavirus-speeds-up-china-supply-chain-exodus

 

Seventy-six percent of finance chiefs whose companies have manufacturing in China indicated in a survey by Swiss lender UBS that the pandemic has reinforced their company’s goal of moving at least some of that production elsewhere. Thirty-four percent of the more than 450 executives surveyed represent companies with manufacturing in China.

 

U.S.-based firms weren’t the only ones looking to move: 85 percent of North Asian firms and 60 percent of Chinese manufacturers also said they were planning to move at least some production from the mainland, where COVID-19 was first identified late last year.

 

Of the firms surveyed, 92 percent of healthcare companies and 89 percent of consumer staple firms have already moved capacity out of China or are planning to do so. Technology (80 percent) and consumer discretionary (76 percent) producers were also more likely to leave than industrials (69 percent) and materials (57 percent) manufacturers.

 

[Investor20]

Most of the things are not hard. How hard is it to put on a mask? Is it done?

Lockdown is very hard on many people.  It is one thing to say open your shop and have good ventilation.  Another to say shut your shop and sit at home.

 

So, are you "pro-mask" then? You seem to change the subject whenever anyone mentions masks.

 

IMO, shutting down was a no-brainer at the start, and now opening shops while requiring masks in public enclosed spaces (and ideally good ventilation) is also a no brainer.

I have posted several times supporting using masks.

 

That said, shutting down was not a no-brainer at any time for many reasons.

 

The Japanese did not go into lockdowns for a very good reason.  They got this ventilation aspect from WHO guidelines for other respiratory diseases such as Measles and Turberculosis. 

 

To me a no-brainer is to start with established protocols for other respiratory transmitted infections like Measles and Tuberculosis.  That means use of masks and ventilation.

 

Lockdown decreases ventilation.  Having people go out increases ventilation.

 

Lockdown has many other effects such as loss of jobs, other areas of healthcare being effected such as cancer screenings.

Possibility of second waves after lockdowns.

 

So, lockdowns were never a no-brainer.  Following using of masks and ventilation which are protocols for TB and measles are.

One should start exactly where Japanese started.  Established protocols for similar infections.

 

https://japan.kantei.go.jp/ongoingtopics/COVID19CASFlyer/PROffice3CGuide_en.pdf

[DooDiligence]

I think everyone here knows I'm a fiscal conservative, but a liberal socialist when it comes to individual rights.

 

But I have to ask my liberal friends, are we going too far in some issues.  Now they are banning "Gone With the Wind".  What's next, "Forrest Gump?"

 

I knew GWTW was racist when I first saw it as a kid, same with Breakfast at Tiffany's, but are we going to outlaw all movies and books with racist connotations?  We would then have to ban books like "To Kill a Mockingbird", which would serve the opposite purpose of the book's moral outrage at racism.

 

Banning confederate flags at Nascar...yes, I think that is very reasonable.  But when you start skewing history and censoring information written in a historical context or period, you are actually moving closer to the direction of Nazi's than away.

 

And you are talking to a Indo-Canadian kid born in Canada, whose family is made up of Hindus, Punjabis, Blacks, Chinese, Vietnamese, Italian and English backgrounds!  Cheers!

 

If we're going to ban confederate flags, you should also ban any other flags that might offend people. It's not right to censor one view just because group X gets offended but allow another flag to go  even though it offends group Y.

That's bullshit. There are plenty of instances of banned flags because of what they represent. Throughout most of the eastern block you cannot display flags with the hammer and sickle for example. In Germany it is illegal to display the Third Reich flag or any nazi symbols. These laws are mainly for a few whackaoos because no organization in their right mind over there would ever display one of these flags or symbols.

 

Keep in mind that these were actually the official country flags for these countries. In some cases for a long period of time and they are banned. The idea of banning the battle flag of a bunch of traitors that started an open insurrection against a country that led to the deadliest war that country has ever experienced isn't that out there.

 

I'm not a fan of the confederate flag but I see no reason why the folks who enjoy that flag should be discriminated against if one is really "tolerant." We're not talking about Germany here. We're talking about the US. Would you be in favor of then, saying banning something like the flag of Japan because we were at war with them at one time and that they bombed Pearl Harbor?

 

Spoken like someone who's never spent any quality time in NW FL or lower AL.

 

It's not a matter of "enjoying" the confederate flag.

It's a symbol of racism & those who fly it are making their feelings known.

If you doubt what I'm saying, I invite you to visit & I'll take you on a tour of our beautiful beaches.

 

It's a symbol of racism to you. That doesn't mean they see it way. Why be so intolerant?

 

The invitation is wide open.

 

Come on down & get a good look at your enjoyable flag & it’s proud wavers.

 

I’ll grill up some crow for you.

[Spekulatius]

In a way, - I don't know which - the current line of posting in this topic has to stop.

For those interested, here is a distilled list of best-evidence that has built up over the last few weeks versus prevention of transmission.

https://academic.oup.com/jid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/infdis/jiaa189/5820886

https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/publications-data/using-face-masks-community-reducing-covid-19-transmission

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext

 

From a humble perspective, a detached and rational approach tends to avoid running into sterile debates and tribal drift but i often feel like an idiot.

It's fascinating that this virus, which is somewhat benign from an evolutionary standpoint, stirs so much reptilian instincts and one has to wonder about the host (and its institutions).

Maybe i focus too much on governance issues.

 

Here is another one :

https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/9/20-2272_article

 

Runs a bit against my hypothesis that truly asymptomatic (And those that never show symptoms) younger people aren’t likely superspreaders. Well, it seem they can be.

[Investor20]

In a way, - I don't know which - the current line of posting in this topic has to stop.

For those interested, here is a distilled list of best-evidence that has built up over the last few weeks versus prevention of transmission.

https://academic.oup.com/jid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/infdis/jiaa189/5820886

https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/publications-data/using-face-masks-community-reducing-covid-19-transmission

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext

 

From a humble perspective, a detached and rational approach tends to avoid running into sterile debates and tribal drift but i often feel like an idiot.

It's fascinating that this virus, which is somewhat benign from an evolutionary standpoint, stirs so much reptilian instincts and one has to wonder about the host (and its institutions).

Maybe i focus too much on governance issues.

 

Here is another one :

https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/9/20-2272_article

 

Runs a bit against my hypothesis that truly asymptomatic (And those that never show symptoms) younger people aren’t likely superspreaders. Well, it seem they can be.

 

Whether one is truly asymptomatic or get some mild symptoms later is not that important.  Its been clear for a while that there is asymptomatic transmission, which happens while talking.  To some extent masks help but not eliminate small tiny droplets floating in air and its difficult to wear masks continuously.

 

That is why Japanese say "ventilation is key".  That makes everyone life easier.  And now we know it works. I think we should copy what works. That is not to say not to use masks or stop washing hands or stop safe distance. But no need for enforced lockdowns.

 

[Parsad]

I think everyone here knows I'm a fiscal conservative, but a liberal socialist when it comes to individual rights.

 

But I have to ask my liberal friends, are we going too far in some issues.  Now they are banning "Gone With the Wind".  What's next, "Forrest Gump?"

 

I knew GWTW was racist when I first saw it as a kid, same with Breakfast at Tiffany's, but are we going to outlaw all movies and books with racist connotations?  We would then have to ban books like "To Kill a Mockingbird", which would serve the opposite purpose of the book's moral outrage at racism.

 

Banning confederate flags at Nascar...yes, I think that is very reasonable.  But when you start skewing history and censoring information written in a historical context or period, you are actually moving closer to the direction of Nazi's than away.

 

And you are talking to a Indo-Canadian kid born in Canada, whose family is made up of Hindus, Punjabis, Blacks, Chinese, Vietnamese, Italian and English backgrounds!  Cheers!

 

If we're going to ban confederate flags, you should also ban any other flags that might offend people. It's not right to censor one view just because group X gets offended but allow another flag to go  even though it offends group Y.

 

The confederate flag's connotations go well past the Civil War and part of history.  It's seen similarly to the Nazi emblems and flags.  A time in history when great atrocities against other human beings were being tolerated and supported.  The only place for these flags and emblems are in historical textbooks or movies addressing these historical times. Tattooing the confederate flag on your body should be viewed exactly the same way as tattooing "SS" or "Swastika" symbols on your body.  Cheers!

 

Don't you think you're being a little bigoted and not inclusive enough (I'm not calling you a bigot by the way, Sanj, just making a point)?

 

Don't you think that everyone should feel welcome to express their "true" self at Nascar races? Yes, I know the confederate flag doesn't represent your values but it represents theirs. Why is it okay to think that your values should oppress theirs? True tolerance and acceptance means diversity - even if you disagree with it.

 

The confederate flag doesn't have to represent slavery. It could mean southern pride or state's rights.

 

Why is it okay to have a rainbow flag for gay pride but not have a confederate flag for southern pride?

 

Plenty of people like the confederate flag. Is it hurting anyone when it's flown?

 

By the way, as an Indian, I'm sure you know that the swastika isn't really from the Nazis. ;)

 

For whatever it's worth, I don't actually support the confederate flag. I'm just trying to get to a point here about "feelings."

 

Well, you've nailed it on the head actually Paul.  The Swastika had nothing to do with the Nazi's, nor the connotation it took on under them. 

 

But to so many it has become an affront, a reminder of Nazi Germany, a reminder of millions of people killed under the Nazi's Aryan Nation objective.  As such, there is a bigger symbolic reference than what the origins of the symbol intended...so for the most part, it has to go.

 

This is no different around the Confederate flag.  Its connotation is greater than the 11 Southern states under the confederacy...it's a reminder of extreme social injustices and inequality...as well as the near-death of a Nation.  The confederate flag should actually be offensive to any American living today, not some banner of how great the South was!  Cheers!

[Parsad]

I think everyone here knows I'm a fiscal conservative, but a liberal socialist when it comes to individual rights.

 

But I have to ask my liberal friends, are we going too far in some issues.  Now they are banning "Gone With the Wind".  What's next, "Forrest Gump?"

 

I knew GWTW was racist when I first saw it as a kid, same with Breakfast at Tiffany's, but are we going to outlaw all movies and books with racist connotations?  We would then have to ban books like "To Kill a Mockingbird", which would serve the opposite purpose of the book's moral outrage at racism.

 

Banning confederate flags at Nascar...yes, I think that is very reasonable.  But when you start skewing history and censoring information written in a historical context or period, you are actually moving closer to the direction of Nazi's than away.

 

And you are talking to a Indo-Canadian kid born in Canada, whose family is made up of Hindus, Punjabis, Blacks, Chinese, Vietnamese, Italian and English backgrounds!  Cheers!

 

If we're going to ban confederate flags, you should also ban any other flags that might offend people. It's not right to censor one view just because group X gets offended but allow another flag to go  even though it offends group Y.

That's bullshit. There are plenty of instances of banned flags because of what they represent. Throughout most of the eastern block you cannot display flags with the hammer and sickle for example. In Germany it is illegal to display the Third Reich flag or any nazi symbols. These laws are mainly for a few whackaoos because no organization in their right mind over there would ever display one of these flags or symbols.

 

Keep in mind that these were actually the official country flags for these countries. In some cases for a long period of time and they are banned. The idea of banning the battle flag of a bunch of traitors that started an open insurrection against a country that led to the deadliest war that country has ever experienced isn't that out there.

 

I'm not a fan of the confederate flag but I see no reason why the folks who enjoy that flag should be discriminated against if one is really "tolerant." We're not talking about Germany here. We're talking about the US. Would you be in favor of then, saying banning something like the flag of Japan because we were at war with them at one time and that they bombed Pearl Harbor?

 

Spoken like someone who's never spent any quality time in NW FL or lower AL.

 

It's not a matter of "enjoying" the confederate flag.

It's a symbol of racism & those who fly it are making their feelings known.

If you doubt what I'm saying, I invite you to visit & I'll take you on a tour of our beautiful beaches.

 

It's a symbol of racism to you. That doesn't mean they see it way. Why be so intolerant?

 

Why remove asbestos?  Why not continue using lead pipes?  Let's continue serving 40 oz cups of Cola to children.  White hoods should be allowed like all Halloween costumes.  Chloro-fluoro-carbons should be used again, because the hole in the ozone layer has closed.  The world changes, moral standards change, slowly we all become more enlightened!  Do you guys still call your female staff or colleagues "sweetie" or "honey"?  Cheers!

[Liberty]

https://thehill.com/homenews/coronavirus-report/503049-fauci-says-he-hasnt-talked-with-trump-in-two-weeks

[Spekulatius]

In a way, - I don't know which - the current line of posting in this topic has to stop.

For those interested, here is a distilled list of best-evidence that has built up over the last few weeks versus prevention of transmission.

https://academic.oup.com/jid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/infdis/jiaa189/5820886

https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/publications-data/using-face-masks-community-reducing-covid-19-transmission

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext

 

From a humble perspective, a detached and rational approach tends to avoid running into sterile debates and tribal drift but i often feel like an idiot.

It's fascinating that this virus, which is somewhat benign from an evolutionary standpoint, stirs so much reptilian instincts and one has to wonder about the host (and its institutions).

Maybe i focus too much on governance issues.

 

Here is another one :

https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/9/20-2272_article

 

Runs a bit against my hypothesis that truly asymptomatic (And those that never show symptoms) younger people aren’t likely superspreaders. Well, it seem they can be.

 

Whether one is truly asymptomatic or get some mild symptoms later is not that important.  Its been clear for a while that there is asymptomatic transmission, which happens while talking.  To some extent masks help but not eliminate small tiny droplets floating in air and its difficult to wear masks continuously.

 

That is why Japanese say "ventilation is key".  That makes everyone life easier.  And now we know it works. I think we should copy what works. That is not to say not to use masks or stop washing hands or stop safe distance. But no need for enforced lockdowns.

 

I agree on ventilation. in retrospect, closing down parks and beaches was probably a mistake, since with a bit of precaution, outdoors activities are pretty low risk. Also anecdotal, a significant outbreak In a nursing home in Montreal was at least partly linked to bad ventilation:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/vigi-long-term-care-home-all-residents-infected-1.5569178

 

 

As far as asymptomatic vs presymptomatic, I would think that the latter probably has a much higher viral load and becomes more likely a superspreader than the former. The problem for an individual of course is that one has no way of knowing in which group you are going to go beforehand. However, it might be of value when you look at populations. I guess more evidence is needed. It’s seems at least that kids don’t spread as much as thought, but there are probably socioeconomic and behavioral aspect as well that I am not sure about.

[Liberty]

As I saw posted recently, the Confederacy lasted for 5 years. It's not a country like Ireland with a long tradition and symbolism and culture, it's a very specific cause that means a few very specific things. I've had t-shirts that are older than the Confederacy. It's not "your heritage", it's about breaking up the United States and defending slavery, and they lost the war, after many americans died, which isn't usually exactly something to celebrate, unless the whole point of those showing their symbols is to say that they wish they had won and broken up the US and kept slavery. Pretending otherwise is like pretending that the Third Reich was about national pride and try to sweep under the rug the racism and aggression and genocide. I'm sure a bunch of people never thought about those things while showing the symbols, but that doesn't make it otherwise, just like my parents have used some racist and anti-semitic expressions that they didn't realize were so (or didn't think were big deals) because they were just repeating stuff they had heard as kids and never thought about it much...

 

If it was a southern thing, why don’t all the blacks and latinos down south feel like it’s their heritage, and it’s 99.99% whites?

[rb]

In a way, - I don't know which - the current line of posting in this topic has to stop.

For those interested, here is a distilled list of best-evidence that has built up over the last few weeks versus prevention of transmission.

https://academic.oup.com/jid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/infdis/jiaa189/5820886

https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/publications-data/using-face-masks-community-reducing-covid-19-transmission

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext

 

From a humble perspective, a detached and rational approach tends to avoid running into sterile debates and tribal drift but i often feel like an idiot.

It's fascinating that this virus, which is somewhat benign from an evolutionary standpoint, stirs so much reptilian instincts and one has to wonder about the host (and its institutions).

Maybe i focus too much on governance issues.

 

Here is another one :

https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/9/20-2272_article

 

Runs a bit against my hypothesis that truly asymptomatic (And those that never show symptoms) younger people aren’t likely superspreaders. Well, it seem they can be.

 

Whether one is truly asymptomatic or get some mild symptoms later is not that important.  Its been clear for a while that there is asymptomatic transmission, which happens while talking.  To some extent masks help but not eliminate small tiny droplets floating in air and its difficult to wear masks continuously.

 

That is why Japanese say "ventilation is key".  That makes everyone life easier.  And now we know it works. I think we should copy what works. That is not to say not to use masks or stop washing hands or stop safe distance. But no need for enforced lockdowns.

 

About that mask thing...

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/06/17/pelosi-masks-house-rule-jordan/

 

You can't even get the leadership of the country to put on a mask.

[stahleyp]

I think everyone here knows I'm a fiscal conservative, but a liberal socialist when it comes to individual rights.

 

But I have to ask my liberal friends, are we going too far in some issues.  Now they are banning "Gone With the Wind".  What's next, "Forrest Gump?"

 

I knew GWTW was racist when I first saw it as a kid, same with Breakfast at Tiffany's, but are we going to outlaw all movies and books with racist connotations?  We would then have to ban books like "To Kill a Mockingbird", which would serve the opposite purpose of the book's moral outrage at racism.

 

Banning confederate flags at Nascar...yes, I think that is very reasonable.  But when you start skewing history and censoring information written in a historical context or period, you are actually moving closer to the direction of Nazi's than away.

 

And you are talking to a Indo-Canadian kid born in Canada, whose family is made up of Hindus, Punjabis, Blacks, Chinese, Vietnamese, Italian and English backgrounds!  Cheers!

 

If we're going to ban confederate flags, you should also ban any other flags that might offend people. It's not right to censor one view just because group X gets offended but allow another flag to go  even though it offends group Y.

That's bullshit. There are plenty of instances of banned flags because of what they represent. Throughout most of the eastern block you cannot display flags with the hammer and sickle for example. In Germany it is illegal to display the Third Reich flag or any nazi symbols. These laws are mainly for a few whackaoos because no organization in their right mind over there would ever display one of these flags or symbols.

 

Keep in mind that these were actually the official country flags for these countries. In some cases for a long period of time and they are banned. The idea of banning the battle flag of a bunch of traitors that started an open insurrection against a country that led to the deadliest war that country has ever experienced isn't that out there.

 

I'm not a fan of the confederate flag but I see no reason why the folks who enjoy that flag should be discriminated against if one is really "tolerant." We're not talking about Germany here. We're talking about the US. Would you be in favor of then, saying banning something like the flag of Japan because we were at war with them at one time and that they bombed Pearl Harbor?

 

Spoken like someone who's never spent any quality time in NW FL or lower AL.

 

It's not a matter of "enjoying" the confederate flag.

It's a symbol of racism & those who fly it are making their feelings known.

If you doubt what I'm saying, I invite you to visit & I'll take you on a tour of our beautiful beaches.

 

It's a symbol of racism to you. That doesn't mean they see it way. Why be so intolerant?

 

Why remove asbestos?  Why not continue using lead pipes?  Let's continue serving 40 oz cups of Cola to children.  White hoods should be allowed like all Halloween costumes.  Chloro-fluoro-carbons should be used again, because the hole in the ozone layer has closed.  The world changes, moral standards change, slowly we all become more enlightened!  Do you guys still call your female staff or colleagues "sweetie" or "honey"?  Cheers!

 

 

A) showing your "southern pride" by wearing a flag isn't hurting anyone. Even if it did hurt people, the moral value of that is subjective. Plenty of societies allow people to hurt (or kill) others without punishment.

 

B) We've become more enlightened? You really believe that? If you're an atheist such a thing as moral progress most certainly does not exist. There is an illusion of progress but it's really just personal opinion (much like Hitler's version of progress was an illusion).

 

It's irrational to believe such a thing exists because there is no evidence. Do you honestly think you have more "moral insight" than the slave owners did? Why on earth would you think that? Did Hitler also have more "moral insight" than you?

 

Perhaps if the Nazis would have won WWII, you would be thanking Hitler for his version of "enlightenment" too (well, maybe not for Indians but others might have thought that!)? Or perhaps if the Confederacy had won, Americans would be thinking Davis for the "good work" he did too?

 

So overall my point is this: if atheism is accurate, it is quite silly to act like there is some higher moral standard we should be aiming for (after all, atheists only believe in things with evidence and there is no evidence for a higher moral standard so its best to be neutral on such matters). Likewise, it's silly to act like slavery, racism (or anything else) is "bad" because the people committing those acts have just as much moral insight as any of us.

[meiroy]

I think everyone here knows I'm a fiscal conservative, but a liberal socialist when it comes to individual rights.

 

But I have to ask my liberal friends, are we going too far in some issues.  Now they are banning "Gone With the Wind".  What's next, "Forrest Gump?"

 

I knew GWTW was racist when I first saw it as a kid, same with Breakfast at Tiffany's, but are we going to outlaw all movies and books with racist connotations?  We would then have to ban books like "To Kill a Mockingbird", which would serve the opposite purpose of the book's moral outrage at racism.

 

Banning confederate flags at Nascar...yes, I think that is very reasonable.  But when you start skewing history and censoring information written in a historical context or period, you are actually moving closer to the direction of Nazi's than away.

 

And you are talking to a Indo-Canadian kid born in Canada, whose family is made up of Hindus, Punjabis, Blacks, Chinese, Vietnamese, Italian and English backgrounds!  Cheers!

 

If we're going to ban confederate flags, you should also ban any other flags that might offend people. It's not right to censor one view just because group X gets offended but allow another flag to go  even though it offends group Y.

That's bullshit. There are plenty of instances of banned flags because of what they represent. Throughout most of the eastern block you cannot display flags with the hammer and sickle for example. In Germany it is illegal to display the Third Reich flag or any nazi symbols. These laws are mainly for a few whackaoos because no organization in their right mind over there would ever display one of these flags or symbols.

 

Keep in mind that these were actually the official country flags for these countries. In some cases for a long period of time and they are banned. The idea of banning the battle flag of a bunch of traitors that started an open insurrection against a country that led to the deadliest war that country has ever experienced isn't that out there.

 

I'm not a fan of the confederate flag but I see no reason why the folks who enjoy that flag should be discriminated against if one is really "tolerant." We're not talking about Germany here. We're talking about the US. Would you be in favor of then, saying banning something like the flag of Japan because we were at war with them at one time and that they bombed Pearl Harbor?

 

Spoken like someone who's never spent any quality time in NW FL or lower AL.

 

It's not a matter of "enjoying" the confederate flag.

It's a symbol of racism & those who fly it are making their feelings known.

If you doubt what I'm saying, I invite you to visit & I'll take you on a tour of our beautiful beaches.

 

It's a symbol of racism to you. That doesn't mean they see it way. Why be so intolerant?

 

Why remove asbestos?  Why not continue using lead pipes?  Let's continue serving 40 oz cups of Cola to children.  White hoods should be allowed like all Halloween costumes.  Chloro-fluoro-carbons should be used again, because the hole in the ozone layer has closed.  The world changes, moral standards change, slowly we all become more enlightened!  Do you guys still call your female staff or colleagues "sweetie" or "honey"?  Cheers!

 

 

A) showing your "southern pride" by wearing a flag isn't hurting anyone. Even if it did hurt people, the moral value of that is subjective. Plenty of societies allow people to hurt (or kill) others without punishment.

 

B) We've become more enlightened? You really believe that? If you're an atheist such a thing as moral progress most certainly does not exist. There is an illusion of progress but it's really just personal opinion (much like Hitler's version of progress was an illusion).

 

It's irrational to believe such a thing exists because there is no evidence. Do you honestly think you have more "moral insight" than the slave owners did? Why on earth would you think that? Did Hitler also have more "moral insight" than you?

 

Perhaps if the Nazis would have won WWII, you would be thanking Hitler for his version of "enlightenment" too (well, maybe not for Indians but others might have thought that!)? Or perhaps if the Confederacy had won, Americans would be thinking Davis for the "good work" he did too?

 

So overall my point is this: if atheism is accurate, it is quite silly to act like there is some higher moral standard we should be aiming for (after all, atheists only believe in things with evidence and there is no evidence for a higher moral standard so its best to be neutral on such matters). Likewise, it's silly to act like slavery, racism (or anything else) is "bad" because the people committing those acts have just as much moral insight as any of us.

 

 

You are not a conservative or an individual with a good moral character.  What you are, is a religious fundamentalist, similar to what you would find in Iran or Afghanistan.