Whats the point (or I am a SKEPTIC)

[sherminator505 10]

I don't see the similarity either, although I have found that name-calling is no substitute for a good argument (or even a poor one).

[NJCubScouter 1389]

Let's remember though, that simply making a poor argument, or employing some of the general "mild" nastiness that tends to creep into the Issues and Politics discussions, does not generally result in a thread being shut down. (When it descends to, "You're stupid", "No, YOU'RE stupid", "Well you're stupid ten times", etc. etc., eventually a line is crossed and the thread may closed, but I think there have been very few closures of that type. From what I have seen, the moderators usually try to deal directly with the "combatants" in that case, with mixed success.)

 

Using "Nazi" or "Hitler" analogies, however, goes beyond just demonstrating the weakness of an argument, and goes way past general nastiness. It "rings the bell", so to speak. It tends to stop a discussion of an issue dead in its tracks and converts the discussion into one about the appropriateness of the analogy, basically ending the discussion of the topic at hand. I think this is part of the reason why many Internet forums follow the "tradition" (which dates from the early 90's, when "Internet forums" consisted of Usenet and mailing lists) that invoking Nazis, Hitler, etc. is a thread-closer.

[acco40 95]

Hear ye, hear ye - I shout this from the rooftops for all to hear.

 

As a moderator, I will shut down any thread and edit posts as I see fit or until I'm removed as a moderator. That is my rule.

 

Now, nobody may rightfully accuse me of making up capricious rules. :0

[packsaddle 753]

Use of the term 'Nazi' by itself, I think, is not grounds for closure. For example, I seem to remember some time in the past, informing the forums that my wife sometimes refers to me as a "humorless WASP with thin Nazi lips". And the thread was not closed.

I add that I do TOO have a sense of humor!

[Stosh 3452]

One must also remember that words have a way of changing in meaning over the years. Obviously the word gay no longer means what it used to as an example. In any argument one must remember that the use of words have a tendency to push buttons on certain people and thus the intent of using the words come into play. If one were to use the historic meaning it may mean one thing to them and something entirely different to someone else.

 

Word preference is always suspect and leads to inflamed discussions on most forums. As a moderator, they must always be vigilant in trying to decipher the intent of the words. It's not an easy task I can assure you.

 

Personally I don't object to the term NAZI to describe ideals that are taken way over the top. We use it with such references as uniform NAZI's etc. and I can understand what the person is trying to convey without getting overly concerned.

 

Of course there are plenty of examples where certain terms going one way are not acceptable going the other. It usually means one group is more sensitive than the other. The term Red man or Black man are not acceptable as White man. Go figure. To think that someone got gypped in a financial transaction or Jewed, might draw some ire, but dealing with a Scotsman isn't.

 

Here in Wisconsin, all the Indian logos have to be removed from the schools, but the Vikings go on without batting an eye. Even if us Norske's were to complain, they'd laugh us off as over-sensitive and not covered by the law.

 

So what it all boils down to is who's ox is getting gored.

 

All this playground antics on the forum makes for great inflamed threads, but usually don't really accomplish much in the long run. Sure there are those that feel it necessary to attack the person, but it usually means they are on the short end of the discussion and have run out of resources to continue the discussion on a civil level. Once that happens one might wish to close the thread because it isn't going anywhere anyway. All the points on the topic have been made and there's nothing left to discuss except the person themselves.

 

As a 4' 11" freshman in high school, I had heard it all and yet the words of my Mother always seem to play themselves in the back of my head saying, "Sticks and stones..."

 

I try to be careful with the words I use. They say something to me as I formulate my posts, but it doesn't always work out the way it was intended when someone reads it. When sending to hundreds of people out there, there are always going to be a few that may take offense. I take offense at some things as well, but I go back and give the benefit of the doubt to the writer and try to decipher what it was they were really trying to say. If I can't, I just move on. If I'm being a bit humorous or sarcastic, I try and put in a few to make sure the reader understands it's a bit of tongue-in-cheek with what I'm saying. After all the more you feel like friends on the forum, the more one feels the urge to banter a bit. It doesn't always work out that way, unfortunately.

 

Your mileage may vary,

 

Stosh

[NJCubScouter 1389]

I had a fairly long post written in response to Stosh's but I decided that it would just inflame the discussion, and at this point I'd rather just see this thread start drifting its way down into archive-land.

 

But when you say "Your mileage may vary" on this subject, you're certainly right about that. Our mileage varies. Use of terms like "uniform Nazi", "soup Nazi" etc. are offensive to some (including me) -- not because I think the user of such term is calling someone a Nazi, but because terms like this trivialize what the Nazis really were about. The Nazis were not simply overly strict, like people who obsess on where other people wear patches on their uniforms, or who deny people soup. They murdered people and committed war crimes on a massive scale, among other things. It's just not a good analogy to everyday life. That's my "mileage" on the subject.

 

On some of your other points, I think it's a matter of perspective. There may also be some factual issues here. The term "red man" is, thankfully, considered unacceptable these days, but I am not sure "black man" is in the same category. Despite the efforts of some over the years to have "African American" to replace "black", I don't think it ever really happened. The two terms exist side-by-side today, and to most people, both are acceptable. Of course that may just be my perspective, as I am a "white man."

 

If I keep going, I will re-create the post that I deleted. You'll just have to trust me, you wouldn't have wanted to read it.

[acco40 95]

Does cheese head strike a nerve?

 

I think a show with primarily Jewish writers used coined the phrase "Soup Nazi" and the fact that WWII is now 55 years in the past has lessened the pain some feel with the term but yes, it is still provocative.

 

My mother related a funny (to me) story to me. In the late 50's when my brother and I were about 2 & 3 years old, we moved from Baltimore to Kansas. Back then the "races" were kept much more separated than they are today. One of the moving folks was a black man, which I'm guessing neither my brother or I had never seen up close and he was rather dark complected. Well, my brother proclaimed, "Look, a monkey!" He was not picking up ideas from our parents, nor making a derogatory statement in his eyes. Well, my mother was embarrassed as all get out. She took my brother aside and explained to us that some folks are "pink" like us (both my brother, mother and I have red hair and yes, we are pink, not white) and some people are brown like the moving man. Okay, no big deal. Well, the gentleman moving us thought that was hilarious, he never heard of pink/brown but always black/white.

 

Fast forward to my life as a five year old, now living is southern Arizona (yes, I moved around quite a bit in my youth). My neighbor was Mexican. One of my good friends was black. I remember we liked playing in his screened in backyard porch. Anyway, one day we went inside for some reason and I was shocked. Not knowing anything about genetics but having a firm grip on statistics, I noticed that not only was he a black person (looked very different than the majority of folks I interfaced with) but so was his sister, mother, aunts, uncles, grandparents - my gosh his whole family! What are the odds of that happening?

 

Yes, it was a much more innocent time back then.(This message has been edited by acco40)

[BS-87 30]

How did this thread deteriorate into matters of race?

[evmori 11]

It's pie time!

[Scoutfish 16]

"How did this thread deteriorate into matters of race?"

 

Ah, I think that is the point of te original post!

 

The way I se it, it hasn't deteriorated , but rather, expanded into more enlightenment.

 

The 4th paragraph of the original post was:

 

 

 

So the original post was basically about this persons' opinion versus that persons.

 

And the race comenyts fit right in. "Nazi", "Red", "Black" and "white" are perfect examples. I myself never thought the expression "Soup Nazi" would be taken hurtfull or offensively. It was so common and to be honest...wan't tossed around with any kind of anger, just showing stinginess which as was pointed out, is not even close at all to the atrocities commited by the Nazis.

 

So I can at least say, I will not use a certain term anymore even though, when I said it, any kind of mean spiritedness, hate or malice was the farthest thing from my mind.

 

So instead of deteriorating, I think the thread has expanded and enlightened. Which too, also follows the original post of one person thinking this while another thinks that when it concerns the same subject.

[NJCubScouter 1389]

How did this thread deteriorate into matters of race?

 

Stosh started it. But I wouldn't say "deteriorate." Nobody has started calling anybody any names.

 

[Stosh 3452]

Cheesehead? Heck, I've heard worse.

 

One must always be on guard as to how one would wish to decide how to feel about any issue being addressed. No matter how innocent a comment may be there will always be some out there who choose to react in a negative manner. Often we believe that our feelings are not controllable, but in fact they are.

 

Case in point... One is out shopping at the mall and minding their own business looking in all the shop windows. Then all of a sudden someone rams them from behind pushing them up against the window. Like most people I too would react in such a way as to think this inconsiderate person should be hung from a yardarm! Can't they watch were they're going. There's plenty of room, why can't I have a wee bit of the space? I would be mad, very mad at such a situation, however, when they turn around they see a person standing there with a white cane with a red tip on it, now what?. How does one react? Every negative thought dissipates and the offended person does a mental 180 and cuts the person some slack. They choose to take into consideration a multitude of different criteria in which to formulate a decision on the situation contrary to their initial reaction.

 

Sure, there are things on the forums that irk me, (being called a Cheesehead isn't one of them!) I acco40 really covering up hostile feelings with the ? I'm choosing NO. He likes to interject a bit of humor to lighten up the topics so I find no reason to retaliate, after all he isn't a Yupper.

 

But as NYCubScouter points out there are those who's fuses run short when it comes to certain verbiage and I certainly can understand why. While the National Socialist Workers' Party may have inflamed a ton of people after the war, it wasn't all that long ago that: The Only Good Indian was a Dead Indian, rang throughout our own country. While we felt it okay to put all those of Japanese descent into our own concentration camps in a similar manner, no one was separating the Germans out. For those of you who like history, do a little research on the Bund in America during the war. Maybe they should have. I grew up in the 60's so I know how much the struggle for equal rights took it's toll on everyone. NO ONE is exempt from such choices and there are still those who fan the flames of such ignorance, but that's the society in which we live. One doesn't have to participate in it, however.

 

The hypocrisy that Beavah addresses in his original post simply screams itself over and over again until one becomes deaf! Sometimes selective hearing isn't such a bad way to react to people. Yes, I may get a bit annoyed by being the butt of all the Sven and Ole jokes floating around, but I don't have to let on that it's such a big deal it needs the light of day. Cheesehead? Yeah, but it's true.

 

As far as my salutation, "Your mileage may vary?" It's my way of saying that my opinion isn't the be-all, end-all to the conversation and I'm hoping that others will add to, disprove, or whatever they wish to do with it, is fine with me. As a matter of fact, "getting in the last word", is often times not very helpful.

 

Like an old Scouter friend of mine used to say, when you point your finger at someone else, there's four more in that hand pointing back at you. He's right, you know.

 

Your mileage may vary, (and I hope it does or this forum would cease to exist! )

 

Stosh

[packsaddle 753]

"Your mileage may vary"

And so I was thinking this referred to our unknown and varied life spans...I was for sure wrong about that! I didn't watch much of 'Seinfeld' but I did catch the episode(s?) when they went for soup. I see a parallel here...a Jewish person can use their 'N' word and in some kind of parallel universe, a black person can use their 'N' word and all is fine. But not for others? Interesting.

I had a group of students out early one morning in Dominica, waiting for a guide (who never showed up). While we were waiting I was accosted by a very aggressive panhandler...and I offered him little encouragement even though he was carrying the usual machete.

He completely lost it and started a rant about it being his country and I owed him something and so on. Somewhere in the rant (and I'm pretty sure he could have outrun me too) he blurted out, "Go F... yourself, Ni....!"

I nearly fell on the ground with laughter. Being referred to as a "Ni...." in this venue meant that I had been 'assimilated' just a bit more...I'd never make it all the way but it was a small step forward. Nice. Then, later in the day I picked up a hitch-hiker, a middle-aged woman, who talked my ear off about her family and such. Then she looked at me and mentioned that she had always wanted to have a baby by a white man...WOW what a day!

[Stosh 3452]

I work in an international company that deals with people from all over the world. My fellow employees come from all over the world as well. I struggle with strange accents over the phone, I try and cipher what it is someone is trying to say to me in emails that don't make sense, and I enjoy every minute of it. I chat with people from all parts of the globe, not just the mix and match of America.

 

What I have noticed is the wider the scope of territory, the less of an issue it is. There seems to be more press coverage of the black/white neighborhoods in one little city than all total lack of concern when actually meeting someone from a foreign country and differing race. And the closer the connection seems to produce the shortest fuses.

 

Case in point. NAACP is a black racially oriented group designed to promote only one race. They are not considered a "hate" group, but in fact any white racially oriented group designed to promote one race is. I'm thinking this kind of one-way bigotry is the hypocrisy that Beavah might be referring to. If a Scout is to be friends to all, why would any of them wish to participate in any of these kinds of groups? I haven't the time of day for either the KKK or the NAACP. I happen to be white, so even though I don't have any liking for the KKK, because I don't have any particular liking for the NAACP, I must therefore be a racist bigot. Guilt by association, i.e. I happen to be white, is the root of all racism. I can't help it if I'm a WASP any more than another happens to be black or Muslim. If I judged people in this manner then yes I would be a bigot, and rightly so. I don't, but I can't stop the other person from choosing to believe in the ways they do. My only responsibility is to how I conduct myself. Heaven knows, I have enough to worry about my own responsibilities than worry about someone else's.

 

My troop consists of whites, blacks, Hispanics, male and female leaders, but they are all Scouts. That always comes first. It is from the common ground that we work, and it is to this goal we strive. I have found that through the years it is a lot easier to get things done from forming common connections, than sitting around picking about our differences. That in fact hasn't produced any effectiveness at all.

 

So, although I don't agree with troops that are half-uniformed by their traditions, I at least can agree that wearing at least a uniform shirt is better than a BSA t-shirt, which is better than nothing. Am I a Uniform NAZI? To some I may be, to others maybe not. I wear the full-uniform, not because I am better than all the rest, but because I believe in the principle of leading by example. I reward scouts who wear the full-uniform correctly, but because I do, I am called out and chastised by others who think that by doing so, somehow I am punishing those that don't. Someone's always going to notice the difference and in their hypocrisy, will make a scene about it.

 

Back in the 60's and 70's there was a big push to raise everyone's awareness about social causes, and I often wondered whether or not this effort to raise awareness may have in fact been more destructive in the long run. The emphasis on pointing out differences only created more problems than they solved. Like I said in an earlier post, when the little black kids came to visit our Podunk town back in the early 60's and all the whites refused to go into the municipal pool because the kids wanted to go swimming, my buddies and I basically had the whole pool to ourselves for the afternoon. The funniest part of the whole process was that someone in town figured out how long it would take for the pool filters to cycle through all the water in the pool and the whites would know when it was safe to go back into the pool. Some even called our parents to complain about my buddies and I. I know for a fact that my Mom just hung up on them. It always amazed me how adults could be so stupid, even while I was a kid myself. As I grew up, I retained my opinion that hypocrisy was stupid, but others didn't.

 

So, am I a bigot? Probably, because I really have a low tolerance level for hypocrites.

 

I'm thinking that this is why....

 

Your mileage may vary,

 

Stosh

[BadenP 93]

Stosh

I am quite frankly surprised by your last post. If you study the history of our country you would know why organizations like the NAACP came into exsistence, but to call them racist is indeed a form of bigotry. The sad truth is that EVERYONE is a bigot in one form or another some keep it inside and some are very vocal. How many times driving and you get cut off by a person of another nationality does some kind of angry racial slur come pouring out of your mouth in anger? It always amuses me when someone states they are not a bigot and then you hear them make several or more racist comments out in public, and they still deny what they are. Yes, everyone is a bigot in one form or another and only when they realize they are can we begin as a country and a world community pull together and work towards a more peaceful and harmonious world.