LETS GETINTO IT!




Moderator: Community Team




Pack Rat wrote:if it quacks like a duck and walk like a duck, it's still fascism
https://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewt ... 0#p5349880
I think racist carries the same negative connotations as bigot.crispybits wrote:None to hand and I cba scrolling through lots of pointless youtube style argument comments sections - but the next time I see one I'll come back and bump this thread with it for you if I remember.thegreekdog wrote:I don't think being called a "racist" versus being called a "bigot" for the same statement will generate different reactions. Do you have examples?
You'll find one yourself if you go to any "contentious" topic (gay marriage / racial equality / whatever) on a website where there's enough right wingers to make them confident enough to spout their hate and enough left wingers to be confident enough pulling them up for it. Racist or homophobe is like water of a duck's back and bigot is like you just called them a "c u next Tuesday" in church very loudly...
I do enjoy a "Mexican" Coke which I hear is made from real sugar.Metsfanmax wrote:This whole thing is nonsense, because Coca Cola is unhealthy and people should not be drinking it anyway.
And real sugar is good for you!thegreekdog wrote:I do enjoy a "Mexican" Coke which I hear is made from real sugar.Metsfanmax wrote:This whole thing is nonsense, because Coca Cola is unhealthy and people should not be drinking it anyway.
Well yeah, it's not, but I don't drink it all the time (maybe once a month). I limit my poor food intake to excessive coffee, cheese, excessive bread products, and red meat.BigBallinStalin wrote:And real sugar is good for you!thegreekdog wrote:I do enjoy a "Mexican" Coke which I hear is made from real sugar.Metsfanmax wrote:This whole thing is nonsense, because Coca Cola is unhealthy and people should not be drinking it anyway.
I recalled reading this a few years ago and was able to look-it up online ... a quaint article on the Phillipine Constabulary Band (now Phillipine Army Band), which William Taft picked to lead his inaugural parade -Dukasaur wrote:What exactly are you trying to say? The 3.5 million Americans of Filipino ethnic origin aren't allowed to be happy about it? Not sure what you're trying to suggest. Are they supposed to burn their American passports and go back home? What about the ones that died in your wars -- are you going to dig up their bones and revoke their citizenship, too?Phatscotty wrote:
Why do you or anyone else think Coca-Cola did this, besides of course being provocative and generating chatter, or is it just flexing their Progressive organs. They say any publicity is good publicity, but I don't think that goes for global corporations. I think Coke knew this would generate a negative backlash, and if they didn't, they need to rethink their entire advertising and marketing campaign.
Tagalog....really
The most interesting part of this is that they had a ship sturdy enough to hold Taft.Before leaving Washington, the band played at the White House for a dinner honoring Japanese dignitaries. Its concert tour continued with performances in New York City, Buffalo, Detroit, Cincinnati, Chicago, Denver, Salt Lake City, Los Angeles, and San Francisco. The band also played for two weeks at the Alaska-Yukon-Pacific Exposition, staged
on the grounds of the University of Washington, in Seattle. Finally, as the band’s Army transport ship crossed San Francisco Bay, en route to Manila, President Taft, who happened to be visiting the area, ordered his vessel—a revenue cutter—to pull alongside the transport. While the Filipino musicians played “Hail to the Chief” on the bridge, Taft “shouted across the water to the khaki clad soldiers: ‘Good-by, boys; I wish you a pleasant voyage!’”
http://www.history.army.mil/armyhistory/AH64%28W%29.pdf
Pack Rat wrote:if it quacks like a duck and walk like a duck, it's still fascism
https://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewt ... 0#p5349880
thegreekdog wrote:Well yeah, it's not, but I don't drink it all the time (maybe once a month). I limit my poor food intake to excessive coffee, cheese, excessive bread products, and red meat.BigBallinStalin wrote:And real sugar is good for you!thegreekdog wrote:I do enjoy a "Mexican" Coke which I hear is made from real sugar.Metsfanmax wrote:This whole thing is nonsense, because Coca Cola is unhealthy and people should not be drinking it anyway.

Only the Coke Cola that they export.thegreekdog wrote:I do enjoy a "Mexican" Coke which I hear is made from real sugar.Metsfanmax wrote:This whole thing is nonsense, because Coca Cola is unhealthy and people should not be drinking it anyway.


pancakemix wrote:Quirk, you are a bastard. That is all.
Does my fix make me a bigot? Racist? Kittens?thegreekdog wrote:I do enjoy a "Mexican" Coke which I hear is made from real sugar cocaine.Metsfanmax wrote:This whole thing is nonsense, because Coca Cola is unhealthy and people should not be drinking it anyway.
Sexually civilized?The Voice wrote:Does my fix make me a bigot? Racist? Kittens?thegreekdog wrote:I do enjoy a "Mexican" Coke which I hear is made from real sugar cocaine.Metsfanmax wrote:This whole thing is nonsense, because Coca Cola is unhealthy and people should not be drinking it anyway.
Great question. My take: Centrally based education/Social programming and narrative control.crispybits wrote:You already have a thread for that PS
I wasn't so much trying to say "this or that is bigotry and anyone who says this or that is a bigot" so much as to wonder why there is almost a stronger backlash to the bigot word than there is to racist or homophobe or xenophobe or misogynist or whatever. It's not about the coke ad either, that was just what got me thinking about it at a point in time when I had a few minutes to start a thread in here.
Say one of the "bigots" gets called a homophobe or a racist, their retort is generally "I don't care, gayness isn't natural" or "they're not like us we shouldn't mix" whatever. They generally attempt to argue the point and make a comeback. But call them a bigot instead and the reaction is often very different (despite the underlying meaning being basically the same), and they get very offended and accuse you of trying to remove their free speech or something (OK generalising slightly, but this is about my anecdotal experience at the end of the day and that's a pattern that I've made in my head)
I'm just wondering why that word often provokes such a different reaction to semantically identical words in various contexts.
Depends on what I see coming down....AndyDufresne wrote:Is this your fiscal policy coming up again?Phatscotty wrote:
Sweet thread and good topic, but I want to go ahead and take the next step. So if it is bigoted just to call someone a pro-lifer or to be pro-life, what is it when a governor of a state tells you you are no longer welcome there, and that you have no place there?
--Andy
Reno 911 (Comedy Central) had an episode where the troopers thoroughly and hilariously butchered God Save the Queen before they shipped the touring British Bobby's bloody body onto a moving truck back to Britain, C.O.D.saxitoxin wrote:Why are people put-off by Tagalog? Filipinos were U.S. nationals until the 1940s. If anything I would think people in the Phillipines would be the ones offended by GBA being sang in Tagalog; like having an American singing God Save the Queen in an ad during the Cornish women's croquet championship (or whatever the big annual sporting event is in the UK).
Edit ... I just watched it on YouTube and I was offended because it was a silly, sappy ad that tries to use some appeal to patriotism to sell carbonated sugar water. Also, I agree with PS or BBS or whomever it was who said the purpose of the ad was to get a thread started on ConquerClub where the word "Coke" would be repeatedly mentioned. If that wasn't it they would have had them singing Goldfinger, or any other song, instead.
lmao!Dukasaur wrote:What exactly are you trying to say? The 3.5 million Americans of Filipino ethnic origin aren't allowed to be happy about it? Not sure what you're trying to suggest. Are they supposed to burn their American passports and go back home? What about the ones that died in your wars -- are you going to dig up their bones and revoke their citizenship, too?Phatscotty wrote:
Why do you or anyone else think Coca-Cola did this, besides of course being provocative and generating chatter, or is it just flexing their Progressive organs. They say any publicity is good publicity, but I don't think that goes for global corporations. I think Coke knew this would generate a negative backlash, and if they didn't, they need to rethink their entire advertising and marketing campaign.
Tagalog....really
Hell of a lot better than high fructose corn syrupthegreekdog wrote:Well yeah, it's not, but I don't drink it all the time (maybe once a month). I limit my poor food intake to excessive coffee, cheese, excessive bread products, and red meat.BigBallinStalin wrote:And real sugar is good for you!thegreekdog wrote:I do enjoy a "Mexican" Coke which I hear is made from real sugar.Metsfanmax wrote:This whole thing is nonsense, because Coca Cola is unhealthy and people should not be drinking it anyway.
Yes, that's all he talks about is fiscal policy.AndyDufresne wrote:Is this your fiscal policy coming up again?Phatscotty wrote:
Sweet thread and good topic, but I want to go ahead and take the next step. So if it is bigoted just to call someone a pro-lifer or to be pro-life, what is it when a governor of a state tells you you are no longer welcome there, and that you have no place there?
--Andy
Bigoted behavior is at its essence uneducated, and extreme bigotry, extremely so, so it is hardly fair to expect a bigot, to debate anything rationally or reasonably, because they are incapable of doing so.crispybits wrote:So, the latest coke ad superbowl hullabaloo got me thinking (dangerous start right there).
I had a quick look at the coke FB page this morning for a giggle about how some people are over-reacting to the whole thing, and a common theme amongst many of the comments is something along the lines of:
"Stop trying to censor me by calling me a bigot just because I have a different opinion to yours"
Now, I'm all for everyone being allowed any opinion they want. I'm all for different people being perfectly entitled to disagree on whatever issue they choose. But I'm also a big fan of people being allowed to say what another opinion is. If I was to state that abortion is murder and that life begins at conception then I should have no problem with someone else calling me a "pro-lifer". If I was to state that the Atlanta Falcons are the best team going at the moment I should have no problem being called an "Atlanta Falcons fan".
Similarly, if I express an opinion that shows me to be intolerant of differences in race, sexuality, gender, culture, etc and that there is only one way to do things (invariably that means the way I do things), then I should have no problem being called a "bigot". It's a dictionary definition that fits perfectly.
So why do the various racists, homophobes and other various idiots who express bigoted opinions have such a problem with others calling a spade a spade and applying the correct label to those opinions?
And if they hate that word so much, why do they hate it? What is it about it that they feel incorrectly labels them in some way? What injustice is being committed by applying the term "bigot" to someone who expresses clearly bigoted opinions?
I don’t know that there is anyone in God’s little acre more devoted to a brand than I am to Coca Cola. That being said, the nation’s soda of record almost drove me into the far less potable arms of Pepsi Cola after seeing the dreadful Super Bowl ad they inflicted upon the world last night.
Coke hit exactly the wrong note! Now before I am dubbed the Grand High Shahu of Xenophobia—I can assure you I am one who delights in all manner of ethnic diversity! However, if I may wax in the vernacular: “Last time I looked, this here was the United States of America!”
The sort of leftist propaganda the carbonated corporate giant indulged in with their new ad, is precisely the rhetoric playing a key role in the growing racial unrest unfortunately sweeping the whole of Europe and the United Kingdom as group after group refuses to be engrafted—The woefully wrongheaded notion that multiculturalism must denounce an expectation of assimilation. It makes one wonder why they left their native lands if they do not want to be a part of the land they immigrated to? It really is the apex of conceit.
The official language of the United States and the language of commerce are English. It is entirely possible to celebrate the wonderful unity our nation engenders under a flag that proudly waves above anyone who wishes to be a part of her, without enabling those unwilling to learn a common tongue.
A mélange need not lose it’s savor, as it blends in, it enhances the whole—homogenization brings differing elements together, makes them stable and keeps them from separating. This is the beauty of American republicanism!
The left seems to prefer Babel, a lack of linguistic understanding as they promote by indulging those who refuse to make an effort to learn English, serves only to repel—it makes it much easier to divide and conquer, to keep groups apart! How do you sow understanding if people are not on the same page? How can we be on the same page if we can’t communicate? How do you build trust?
Coke could have made a wonderful statement simply by having all of those various peoples unite in a common language and desire to indulge in that most lovely of elixirs—Have them all in English saying: “Hi, have a Coke and a smile!” You then celebrate diversity in a way that promotes the nation’s variety without discord! Harmonious voices—“Enjoy Coca Cola,” not a cacophony!
“Be of the same mind one toward another. Mind not high things, but condescend to men of low estate. Be not wise in your own conceits.” Romans 12:16