'black' 'national' anthem being sung...

a reply to: Brotherman

It would require a black nation...of which there isn't one...

Woah! It’s just a song dude(tte)

In saying that, I didn’t know there was a nation called black.

a reply to: drongosrevenge

The only reason to give a group their own anthem is to divide it from the rest.
What is the reason for that, are they not a part of the 'United' States?
Supposing American Polish people, for instance, or some religious group demanded their own anthem at this event, there would be outrage.
And I have to agree with Trump, sorry but there is not much there in the way of talent, and her stylist has her work cut out for her.
Next thing you know, the schools will be ordered to sing two national anthems every morning. This country has gone nuts under biden!

a reply to: drongosrevenge

sorry to be off topic.
but why have you called yourself
drongo.
ques. do you know what the word means.
have a beer on me and i look fwd to your reasoning.

originally posted by: Maxmars

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: Maxmars

Because black culture dares to set aside white privilege for 5 minutes and raise tribute to their own traumas and their spiritual achievements as a community. There's your why.

I am not eager to extend this discussion - I sense I am poking at anger...

But I dare say it is not the "black culture" that is doing anything... just as it was never 'white culture' that did anything. To me such things as 'culture' attributions are all too convenient to eliminate personal responsibilities and provide "group targets." The culture didn't 'decide;' decisions belongs to a 'someone' not a 'culture.' (Unless there is a someone who is actually a representative of black culture. There may be... I just don't know who can make the claim.)

Got a lot of angry white people on this forum who want to protect and broadcast their virtues. Maybe the angry black people should have the same opportunity. The only people who are offended by this concept are people who can't think beyond their own fragile ego.

originally posted by: RickyD
a reply to: TzarChasm

Personally I don't care what songs they wanna sing...no sweat off my back. Its just not a national anthem...and there is no black nation so its not that either. Its just a song to sing which appeases some people and that's all it needs to be.

No black nation? Are you sure about that?

originally posted by: TzarChasm

Got a lot of angry white people on this forum who want to protect and broadcast their virtues. Maybe the angry black people should have the same opportunity. The only people who are offended by this concept are people who can't think beyond their own fragile ego.

I think your observation is correct... The natural reaction to a narrative which imposes guilt on people is for those people to be angry as long as they can deny guilt for something that occurred before they were born. Repetitious reinforcement only amplifies and engenders more anger.

That, however, is not apologism for the anger. The anger is equally misplaced on both sides of the equation. That anger is pointless, and virtue signaling is just a consequence of the defense mechanism anger evokes. It's Bernaysian programming, refined and applied deliberately.

I respect you, and your opinion; but I risk offense by saying that your emotional reaction to the anger might be equally programmatic. I too have an emotional response when I see people's emotions being prodded and stoked... maybe differently than you, but it is there nonetheless.

Virtue signals can be 'naturally occurring'... but when it comes to these discussions, it seems more often than not, that it is a 'prompted reaction' to something external.

But I still say this "song," regardless of what it is being 'called' is not an angry song. Or at least it shouldn't be sung angrily. It seems to be more about the subjective experience... and as such doesn't deserve to be 'exploited' for reasons of "-isms."

And maybe I am a little biased, but I feel that of all the places where "righteous virtue signaling" manifests itself, here at ATS we manage to confront it with some measure of dignity and dispassion... which I can't say is true anywhere else I see it online.

I know you weren't responding to me about a "black nation." But if I might impose... "black" in this context is just a physical trait... by that measure there are no "white nations" either. People can't be simply reduced to physical traits realistically... or we would have "red haired" nations, "left-handed" nations, and nations of people who lisp.

It's foolish to pursue that moving goalpost. That is not to say that nations couldn't be formed based upon the idea... but to say that would be 'good' would be beyond stupid... I know people of my race that would just as soon cut out my tongue rather than allow me to join their "nation of color."

a reply to: Maxmars

Hypocrisy and prejudice tend to bring out the "# you" in me, either you stand up for everyone's rights or you don't stand up at all.

You may have noticed the OP hit enter after composing this topic and then vanished. Even he knew better than to hang around trying to look clever.

a reply to: TzarChasm

Sometimes we speak (or type) prematurely, and 'regret' happens here as much as anywhere else.

I don't fault your response, nor his utterance.

If anything, it proves we have our 'place' here at ATS.

I find some who have fallen under the 'guilt projection' techniques often respond with anger. I think it happens frequently enough to demonstrate that the anger alone is not enough to diagnose the problem. Sometimes we just can't effectively articulate what it is that makes us angry... that's when things get uncomfortable.