dagblog - Comments for "A thought Experiment"

Thanks. Sorry to be slow

A Guy Called LULU — Sat, 27 Jun 2015 05:27:55 +0000

In reply to Just that, someone mentioned

Thanks. Sorry to be slow getting back to say so. I guess this topic is done so I will just veer away and use this spot to say here that I share the Dag group's good cheer at the recent court decisions.

Actually that was my

PeraclesPlease — Fri, 26 Jun 2015 16:58:35 +0000

In reply to Just that, someone mentioned

Actually that was my Rorschach comment - tickled pink that someone found something in all that verbiage worthwhile.

Just that, someone mentioned

Michael Wolraich — Fri, 26 Jun 2015 15:56:08 +0000

In reply to Thanks, glad to find I was

Just that, someone mentioned on the other threat that the Confederate flag is a Rorschach test. I think that's true of almost any flag. We make them into receptacles of our feelings about the nation or regime or party symbolized by the flag. Love your country, you stand and salute the flag. Don't like a country or its leaders, you outlaw the flag or spit on it or burn it (as Dylann Roof did). But I don't think flags are just passive receptacles. They actually crystallize our feelings and impel us to give a whole nation a thumbs up or thumbs down instead of seeing the complexity. Flags help nationalize us. So in a world without flags, to complete the thought experiment, I think it would be harder to follow national leaders so blindly or revile other nations so thoroughly.

To be clear, I say harder to nationalize, not impossible. Nor is it realistic to eliminate flags. But I think it's interesting to imagine.

Thanks, glad to find I was

A Guy Called LULU — Fri, 26 Jun 2015 01:15:08 +0000

In reply to Lulu, as far as I know the

Thanks, glad to find I was mistaken. If yiu get the urge to say more later when time permits I will be looking forward to it.

Lulu, as far as I know the

Michael Wolraich — Fri, 26 Jun 2015 00:23:20 +0000

In reply to Michael, I appreciate your

Lulu, as far as I know the phrase, "your/my/his bag" does not strongly or even weakly imply bad motives, and I certainly did not intend any such implication. I don't think it's any secret that Israeli policy is one of your pet issues and that you are far more likely to post about Israeli violence against Palestinians than any other interracial or interreligious conflict. I will cop to some mild dismissiveness toward your preoccupation with the occupation, but I trust to you take that in stride.

As for flags, I share your distaste, and I'm always puzzled by other people's reverence for them. Still I find the phenomenon fascinating. My lengthy response to Atheist about the differences between the Nazi flag and Confederate flag on another thread was an expression of that. As I mentioned to PP above, flags seem to absorb all that is good or bad about a country or regime. The criticism of the Confederate flag is really a repudiation of Southern racism. The defense of the flag is really a defense of South independence. They're both in there, and you can't truly separate either one. Likewise, the American and Israeli flags embody some truly great things and some truly horrible things. Some flags, like the Nazi flag and, I would argue, the Confederate flag, are so stained that you can never redeem them, but in most case, the story is mixed. I had more to say, but my wife just called. Have to run.

Michael, I appreciate your

A Guy Called LULU — Thu, 25 Jun 2015 20:20:01 +0000

In reply to I already did ;)

Michael, I appreciate your honesty both as a commenter and as an arbitrator at your own site. One way I have seen it demonstrated is by the fact that you occasionally give me credit when you think I have added something of value and are fair in your response when you disagree and even when I put forward a view that offends you. In this case you have disagreed with me which is certainly fair and you may certainly be correct in some ways but in doing so you have put forward a view that offends me. That is when you say that “my bag” is poking at Israel. The strong implication, as I see it, is that I take cheap shots at Israel which are not justified and come from bad motives. I am confident that you do not believe that all actions of the Israeli government are above criticism which would make any criticism a cheap shot.

You have an arguable point that what I linked to is not a thought experiment, it may be just an analogy of a similar situation made to express a point of view. Maybe/probably, the authors simply wanted to make a statement but I expect that they hoped their analogy would provoke some thought which would bring their readers to see the similarities of present day’s Palestinian’s situation with that of black Americans in the past which to some extent continues through today. If the analogy as valid then we should, I would say, come to similar conclusions in both cases about a wrong being done to a class of people both because of who they are and made possible by who they are and about who has the responsibility to change that situation and who is justified in fighting for that change. Obviously, changing flags would accomplish little or nothing unless it was brought about by a change in the attitude of the flag bearers.

I do not like flags and I think about it every time I stand up in public and put my hand over my heart while one is worshipped like a graven image. But, right now all I can see in your suggested thought experiment is the equivalent of contemplating how the world would be different if everyone lived in the shadow of a big rock candy mountain. Human nature would still prevail and the roots of tribalism and nationalism would prevail as they do in every town that has, for instance, a school. STAND UP and SING ALONG, EVERYBODY!

When some loud braggart tries to put me down

And says his school is great

I tell him right away

"Now what's the matter buddy

Ain't you heard of my school

It's number one in the state"

Hey hey take it away, let's call it fight

So be true to your school

(Rah rah sis boom bah

[Que the jet fighter fly-over and the aerial fire works display]

I already did ;)

Michael Wolraich — Thu, 25 Jun 2015 15:22:12 +0000

In reply to Cool - you start

I already did ;)

Apples and oranges. The

Michael Wolraich — Thu, 25 Jun 2015 15:19:08 +0000

In reply to This whole episode has some

Apples and oranges. The Israeli counterpart to Dylann Roof was Baruch Goldstein.

Cool - you start

anonymouspp — Thu, 25 Jun 2015 15:16:53 +0000

In reply to I haven't really thought of a

Cool - you start

I haven't really thought of a

Michael Wolraich — Thu, 25 Jun 2015 14:19:00 +0000

In reply to Yes, the Israeli example was

I haven't really thought of a world without, and there are a lot of symbols that serve th purpose of a flag. How do we show belonging, territory, etc?

Hence my proposed thought experiment. Lulu's "thought experiment" isn't a thought experiment at all. It's just a predictable jab at the Israelis from Mondoweiss. One might equally propose that Hamas take down its flag--or Syria or Saudi Arabia or Sudan or any other regime that kills innocent people in racial/religious conflicts (Russia? China? U.S.?). But that's not Lulu or Mondoweiss's bag.

Far more interesting, IMO, to consider the significance of symbolism and nationalism, and the way flags seem to absorb the good and evil of the nations they represent, unevenly and subjectively over time.