Nazi flags - OK Pride flags - not OK

B

billvon

Valued Senior Member
In Utah, HB77 is now being voted on (and will likely pass.) It is a bill that is intended to ban Pride flags in classrooms. The relevant language is:

"Any employee of a government entity within a classroom of a school within the public education system, may not:
(a)display a flag in or on the grounds of government property . . .

(3)The prohibition described in Subsection (2) does not apply to the following flags:

(i)a historic version of a flag described in Subsections (3)(a) through (h) that is temporarily displayed for educational purposes."

Also, any staff member who takes down Pride flags is protected - "the attorney general shall defend and the state shall indemnify and hold harmless a person acting
under color of state law to enforce this section for any claims or damages."

Thus Confederate flags and Nazi flags are legal to display. Pride flags are not.
 
Not to minimize the myriad defecations upon the Constitution going on now (it's hard to keep up, really), but this might be one that in actual practice has little if any effect on pedagogy in Utah. Does any teacher actually display any of these flags as a visual aid in teaching history or social studies or whatever? The law sounds like the usual performative chest-pounding whose only real purpose is to stick it to the libtards. I.e. the standard RW ploy of "let's ban something that no one is doing, but this will suggest to the echo chambers that maybe they did, and they will amplify it into something like they're grooming our children for the gay lifestyle!!!"
 
  • Salt Lake Tribune: The bill, HB77, originally applied only to schools. But an update to the bill released ahead of Thursday’s House Education Committee hearing expands the ban to all government buildings or property.

    [...] Approved flags for display in government buildings and schools would include the Utah state and U.S. flags, military flags, flags for other countries, flags for Native American tribes and official flags for colleges and universities. The bill also allows for the flying of a “historic version of a flag ... that is temporarily displayed for educational purposes,” which Lee, R-Layton, said would include the Confederate and Nazi flags.

    [...] In a phone call Thursday night, Lee disputed that he ever said a Nazi flag could be displayed, and argued that would not be allowed under his bill. ”There is a difference between displaying flags in curriculum when you’re teaching on them,” he said. “You don’t censor history here. That’s not what we’re doing.”

If there are exemptions for historical teaching purposes, then the original 1978 rainbow flag that featured eight colors instead of six could possibly find a loophole. Barring there being a specification that the applicable flag has to have been a symbol of a past regime or political party.

What's potentially perplexing, though, is why there should be a need to bring any antiquated, physical flag into the classroom when photographs in history books, projector displays, or the images in instructional computer programs would suffice. Are schools in Utah restricted to only using school supplies of the mid-19th century?
_
 
C C said:
What's potentially perplexing, though, is why there should be a need to bring any antiquated, physical flag into the classroom when photographs in history books, projector displays, or the images in instructional computer programs would suffice. Are schools in Utah restricted to only using school supplies of the mid-19th century?
_
Click to expand...
Maybe they're adopting a living history/role-playing approach to the teaching of history? So they set up labor camps, concentration camps, weed out the Jewish, homosexual, et al students, and display Nazi flags. They get to learn stuff and have some good, wholesome fun at the same time!
 
Pinball1970 said:
The more hateful crap this nut job pushes on the American people the more left I feel.
Click to expand...
Welcome to the club!

I have spent most of my life thinking of myself as a "pink Tory" but find myself now a committed Labour voter, not because my views have changed but because the Tories have gone charging off to the populist far right. Basically they now target the tattooed white van man with silly and divisive posturing, rather than offering coherent ideas for running the country. This transatlantic shitefest seems to be leaking over here.
 
exchemist said:
Welcome to the club!

I have spent most of my life thinking of myself as a "pink Tory" but find myself now a committed Labour voter, not because my views have changed but because the Tories have gone charging off to the populist far right. Basically they now target the tattooed white van man with silly and divisive posturing, rather than offering coherent ideas for running the country. This transatlantic shitefest seems to be leaking over here.
Click to expand...
Kind of the same although I preferred purple labour supporter. I also consider myself to have some views that are "right wing."
I detest 1960s "You can't get me I'm part of the union" mentality for instance. I am also not an enemy of capitalism, I work in business, how could I be? In terms of ideology today though, especially watching the horror show across the pond? I am a woke, lefty, blue democrat loving, tree hugging hippy.
 
Pinball1970 said:
Kind of the same although I preferred purple labour supporter. I also consider myself to have some views that are "right wing."
I detest 1960s "You can't get me I'm part of the union" mentality for instance. I am also not an enemy of capitalism, I work in business, how could I be? In terms of ideology today though, especially watching the horror show across the pond? I am a woke, lefty, blue democrat loving, tree hugging hippy.
Click to expand...
No doubt Mr G can enlarge the list of epithets. :biggrin:
 
C C said:
What's potentially perplexing, though, is why there should be a need to bring any antiquated, physical flag into the classroom when photographs in history books, projector displays, or the images in instructional computer programs would suffice. Are schools in Utah restricted to only using school supplies of the mid-19th century?
_
Click to expand...
I can't get past this: Does this guy really think that teachers keep a bunch of Nazi flags lying around and they ceaselessly practice their "Sieg heil"s in the mirror, cuz they gotta "teach" the kids history? Or is he just a loathesome lying bullshitter, like all the rest, and he had to come up with some lame-ass rationale so that all his buddies can keep flying their Nazi and Confederate flags?

There's that hilarious clip of Jordan Peterson and Russell Brand, from Bret Weinstein's LoserFest, praying:

First off, Peterson has always been a sort of dandy with his bespoke suits and all, but what the fuck? Is he trying to look like the Joker here? And there's that bit starting at 29.49, where Russell Brand goes on about the Kafkaesque, Huxleyan, Orwellian, whatever and Peterson is laughing. Is he thinking like, "yesssss, this is SO awesome", or is he thinking, "these idiots don't have a freakin' clue as to what this guy is talking about"?
 
  • Like
Reactions: C C
parmalee said:
I can't get past this: Does this guy really think that teachers keep a bunch of Nazi flags lying around and they ceaselessly practice their "Sieg heil"s in the mirror, cuz they gotta "teach" the kids history? Or is he just a loathesome lying bullshitter, like all the rest, and he had to come up with some lame-ass rationale so that all his buddies can keep flying their Nazi and Confederate flags?

There's that hilarious clip of Jordan Peterson and Russell Brand, from Bret Weinstein's LoserFest, praying:

First off, Peterson has always been a sort of dandy with his bespoke suits and all, but what the fuck? Is he trying to look like the Joker here? And there's that bit starting at 29.49, where Russell Brand goes on about the Kafkaesque, Huxleyan, Orwellian, whatever and Peterson is laughing. Is he thinking like, "yesssss, this is SO awesome", or is he thinking, "these idiots don't have a freakin' clue as to what this guy is talking about"?
Click to expand...
Brand is trying to reinvent himself, states side, as a sort of right wing evangelical, to avoid prosecutions for sexual assault in the UK.

Guy’s always been a self-absorbed charlatan.:rolleyes:

The annoying thing is that he does, apparently, have sexual charisma. I recall an interview with the Financial Times journalist Lucy Kellaway, a real no-bullshit person, and she confessed she damned nearly fell under his spell.
 
  • Like
Reactions: C C
exchemist said:
Brand is trying to reinvent himself, states side, as a sort of right wing evangelical, to avoid prosecutions for sexual assault in the UK.

Guy’s always been a self-absorbed charlatan.:rolleyes:

The annoying thing is that he does, apparently, have sexual charisma. I recall an interview with the Financial Times journalist Lucy Kellaway, a real no-bullshit person, and she confessed she damned nearly fell under his spell.
Click to expand...
Yes. Brand is also very smart and very quick. I can, at least, appreciate the appeal of Brand, and how people might succumb to his nonsense. With a lot of these other guys, I just don't get it. Charisma is entirely subjective, of course, but still...

Peterson is fascinating. I do not doubt for a minute that he is very intelligent and very well read. At the same time, he frequently alludes to texts and matters which he clearly has not read, and is not at all familiar with. That sort of thing really gets under my skin. He knows that there are times when he truly does not know what he is talking about, but he just banks on the fact that the majority of his audience are ignorant and won't know any better--the ultimate conman and grifter.
 
exchemist said:
Brand is trying to reinvent himself, states side, as a sort of right wing evangelical, to avoid prosecutions for sexual assault in the UK.

Guy’s always been a self-absorbed charlatan.:rolleyes:

The annoying thing is that he does, apparently, have sexual charisma. I recall an interview with the Financial Times journalist Lucy Kellaway, a real no-bullshit person, and she confessed she damned nearly fell under his spell.
Click to expand...
By the way, did you watch the "prayer" towards the end? It's relatively short and starts around 29.49. It's crazy and virtually indistinguishable from parody. What bothers me most is that a portion of the audience are likely aware of this. What binds them is their shared grievances, prejudices and hatred, and they're just willing to let everything else slide because, somehow, that's what's important. The enemy of my enemy and all that.
 
I th
parmalee said:
Yes. Brand is also very smart and very quick. I can, at least, appreciate the appeal of Brand, and how people might succumb to his nonsense. With a lot of these other guys, I just don't get it. Charisma is entirely subjective, of course, but still...

Peterson is fascinating. I do not doubt for a minute that he is very intelligent and very well read. At the same time, he frequently alludes to texts and matters which he clearly has not read, and is not at all familiar with. That sort of thing really gets under my skin. He knows that there are times when he truly does not know what he is talking about, but he just banks on the fact that the majority of his audience are ignorant and won't know any better--the ultimate conman and grifter.
Click to expand...
I suspect Peterson is gradually going nuts. Think he spends too much time in RW echo chambers and it’s affecting his mind. A bit like Muskie.
 
Must confess that I find Brand to be a complete and utter twat. I would/will literally turn off whatever I was watching/listening to rather than see/hear him, so I have zero intention of watching that YT clip. Sorry. He's someone that just feels he has to be the centre of attention. His humour I'm sure appeals to some, but I find it to be cruel. He's a narcissist. Just don't like him, and if he has something interesting to say I'm sure I'll hear it from other people.

Peterson is okay. I don't know the detail of what he's talking about most of the time, and I find he can try to deflect and evade by going into the detail, but with him it may well be that that is where he genuinely thinks the importance is. I don't see him as going nuts, rather just being found out more frequently. It's a shame he never got to debate with Hitchens (Christopher, not Peter).

Somewhat of an off-piste aside: a relative breath of fresh air in that realm is Alex O'Connor. Very measured and calm. His discussion/pod-cast with Peterson about religion is worth a watch, as he doesn't really let Peterson word-salad his way out of things the way he might manage with others. It's 2 hours long if you find it (I won't link it here), so good luck with it. And probably best discussed in the Religion section. ;)
 
Sarkus said:
Must confess that I find Brand to be a complete and utter twat. I would/will literally turn off whatever I was watching/listening to rather than see/hear him, so I have zero intention of watching that YT clip. Sorry. He's someone that just feels he has to be the centre of attention. His humour I'm sure appeals to some, but I find it to be cruel. He's a narcissist. Just don't like him, and if he has something interesting to say I'm sure I'll hear it from other people.
Click to expand...
This is an acceptable substitute for the Brand clip:

I believe it to be a fairly accurate representation of how Trump's CIA operates--if it still exists. I must have watched this scene at least 100 times, and I learn something new from it every time. I am not by any stretch an expert on the CIA (or homemade satellites), but I feel that I have gained sufficient understanding to, at the very least, run the agency (again, if it still exists, that is).
 
Sarkus said:
Must confess that I find Brand to be a complete and utter twat. I would/will literally turn off whatever I was watching/listening to rather than see/hear him, so I have zero intention of watching that YT clip
Click to expand...
Me too a complete ****, loves his own voice and thinks he has some sort of pathway to enlightenment because he used to be a drug addict.
Absolutely not interested in him.
 
Sarkus said:
Somewhat of an off-piste aside: a relative breath of fresh air in that realm is Alex O'Connor
Click to expand...
Was great till he hit vegan mode then would not STFU about it so I stopped watching him.
I have just started watching him again. His interview with Bart Ehrman was good. Not so good with Peter Hitchens.
 
Was unfamiliar with Peter Hitchens. A brief summary makes me wonder what holiday dinners were like, when the brothers both showed up. Very...divergent siblings there. Brand seems to be another self-promoting bore, from what looks like a really FU childhood and various self-harming habits taken on along the way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top