Politics
Share
25 65

? If your wife needs to be confined then she wants to leave. If you're guarding her from a pack of ravenous wolves outside then protection is very necessary. A culture is people, and if the people want it protected, I don't see why it'a dead.

@spareseconds ? If your wife needs to be confined then she wants to leave. If you're guarding her from a pack of ravenous wolves...

I don't see how a culture can be taken away if the people don't want it to be. Nobody can force culture. For it or against it, if you force it, you've already lost.

@runnerdude I don't see how a culture can be taken away if the people don't want it to be. Nobody can force culture. For it or...

If someone else enforced your culture on you, then shouldn't you have to protect your own culture? Like if someone tried to convert you to another religion, I'm sure you'd have to defend your own religion.

@spareseconds If someone else enforced your culture on you, then shouldn't you have to protect your own culture? Like if someone...

Yeah but if you have to shoot someone to stop them from converting you, you must be pretty weak in your religion.

@runnerdude Yeah but if you have to shoot someone to stop them from converting you, you must be pretty weak in your religion.

Shooting is a bit dramatic, but I see nothing wrong with using violence as defense if they use violence first.

@maumau Culture also includes freedom, no ?

Yeah, but haven't we already seen firsthand that freedom needs protecting?

@spareseconds Yeah, but haven't we already seen firsthand that freedom needs protecting?

Yeah, but if freedom needs protecting its not really freedom is it ? There's always the slight fear that your protection might fail, taking away your freedom. And if you're constantly living in fear, are you really free ?

@maumau Yeah, but if freedom needs protecting its not really freedom is it ? There's always the slight fear that your...

It's still freedom...soldiers fighting off invaders who would enslave us are fighting for freedom, but I don't get how that makes us not free...If you're living in fear you are still free. If you're afraid of your protection failing, that doesn't make you un-free. I don't see how that makes any change to your freedom at all. No one's free unless they can defend their freedom.

I'm confused at to what this is referencing?

I feel like replacing protect with enforce is more of the circumstances OP is trying to convey.

That would mean that anyone who has ever taken up arms in protest of anything was right.

Or maybe it means that your ideas are under attack.

Thomass avatar Thomas Disagree +7Reply

If you need to start deleting posts & comments that you don't agree with, then any respect for you is dead.

Sad truth. un smilie

The amirite? POTD doesn't even have "amirite?" at the end. Something's wrong here....

This comment was deleted by its author.
This user has deactivated their account.
@1863953

Have you not seen the dozens of posts about it?

names avatar name Disagree 0Reply
@1863953

The purchase became final on September 22, according to Ant's girlfriend.

So then by that same logic, America having a big military to protect itself, technically its culture is dead?
or
Like the person above me where the Quebecois people have laws in place to protect the Francophones heritage then their culture is dead?
or
Israel which is backed by how many countries protecting it - including America - then they Jewish culture doesn't exist anymore?
or
Perhaps any war where one country has invaded another the 'victim' country should just stop because they don't have a country anymore?
...Makes sense.

@Naggs So then by that same logic, America having a big military to protect itself, technically its culture is dead? or...

1. America has an army to protect its people, not it's culture. We fight against bombs, not religions or languages.
2. Yes. I believe if the language was important to the frankaphones, they wouldn't need laws to protect it.
3. Once again, there's a difference between protecting borders, and protecting culture and ideas.
4. Ibid.

@runnerdude 1. America has an army to protect its people, not it's culture. We fight against bombs, not religions or languages...

1. The purpose of the Army first and foremost yes, is to protect the people however that's not what its used for.
2. That's exactly why the Canadian Government has those laws in place for Quebec, specifically for the purpose of protecting the language.
3. Again, it needs "protection" because it has a differing idea from the nations surrounding it.
4. Often when one country invades another that includes imposing their culture/ideas/language etc on them. (e.g. America, Canada, Morocco, Australia, South Africa, Egypt)

Colonialism.

When you say, "If you need violence to protect your ideas, your ideas are worthless to begin with," is that including events like the American Civil War? They fought against the British to gain independence, so does that mean that the idea of having their own country was worthless?

This user has deactivated their account.
@1864077

Oh this is awkward, cause I definitely did mean the revolutionary war... I don't know why I said Civil War. I'm really sorry.

Hmm... I can see this holding true in instances where the protected culture in question is hostile toward others, but not really for those which truly seek to preserve their heritage (e.g. many First Nations and Native American cultures have seen declines through little to no fault of their own and need support in order to be more than a footnote in a history text). As for the application of violence there are instances where it is necessary, especially if the ideas in question are closely tied to human dignity (e.g. freedom for slaves was a principle defended with men's blood during the American Civil War). Insightful post nonetheless.

The government doesn't protect culture by forcing people to support that culture it protects it by giving people a way to continue practicing their culture.
The picture you're painting is of the government holding these people hostage and making them uphold their culture against their will and this simply isn't the case. People WANT to keep their culture safe, the government protects them against OTHER people destroying their culture.
That doesn't mean their culture is dead, it just means that bigger forces would crush it if nothing was done to protect it.

As many people stated, protection isn't always to keep something from leaving. Sometimes it's to protect it from a stronger outside force from killing it (I.e a much larger culture mixed with yours that is doing things to engulf your culture much like the "melting pot" idea in the us a while ago). This post is over generalized and the example is sometimes false. Cultures are sometimes killed. They're not trying to escape. Of course every comment on here disagreeing with the post will be relentlessly down voted so go ahead.

I don't think so. For example, if someone punches you for wearing something, and you get someone to protect you, that doesn't mean you're already 'dead'.

This post can be directed to the United States. :P

@Sewcdf This post can be directed to the United States. :P

In that case, feel free to direct my middle finger towards yourself. 'MURRICA

@runnerdude In that case, feel free to direct my middle finger towards yourself. 'MURRICA

But it's a correct statement.
It is possible to direct this post toward the direction of the United States troll smilie

So that means the French Canadian culture doesn't exist anymore since the government helps protect the French language with laws and stuff. Hmm interesting I will tell that to my fellow 7,903,001 Quebecois beside me that their culture doesn't exist anymore...

Also is this post meant to be sarcastic or not? If it is ignore comment above

Izzie_23s avatar Izzie_23 Disagree -5Reply
@Izzie_23 So that means the French Canadian culture doesn't exist anymore since the government helps protect the French...

Honestly no, I feel like if Jacques Cartier showed up and saw Quebec and how we've destroyed the language he'd be pretty pissed. If the french and their language need to be 'protected' ,than they've already lost. Forcing people into a culture is just as bad as forcing them to denounce it.

@God_ Honestly no, I feel like if Jacques Cartier showed up and saw Quebec and how we've destroyed the language he'd be...

But Jacques Cartier was French we are Quebecois we did not destroy the language, for some people we made it better, similar to how Americans speak their English and British speak another English even if its the same language. We do not force the culture we force the language. It was said that if immigrants want to live in Quebec they must learn the language. If they wish to speak English they can go anywhere else in Canada. I have been around Canada and I have never see anyone more proud of their culture than the Quebecois. We yell we cheer we love our Provence and Country. You should see us on our national holiday (La Saint-jean) and you wouldn't believe your eyes. Our culture is awesome and we want to keep it from disappearing that doesn't mean it is lost.

Izzie_23s avatar Izzie_23 Disagree -10Reply
@Izzie_23 But Jacques Cartier was French we are Quebecois we did not destroy the language, for some people we made it better...

YOU DON'T WANT YOUR CULTURE DISAPPEARING EH ?

So why do you Quebeckers cause the biggest scene every 5-8 years about a new referendum ?

Christ, even Jean Chrétien wants your asses to ctfd.

@maumau YOU DON'T WANT YOUR CULTURE DISAPPEARING EH ? So why do you Quebeckers cause the biggest scene every 5-8 years...

Well that was rude!
The reason we want a referendum is not because we want to keep our culture from disappearing but because many people acknowledge that Our culture language and interests were completely different from the rest of Canada. We have different beliefs from the rest. Example: The Canadian prime minister wants to destroy the fire registry list. We believe this is a mistake, so we refuse. The rest of Canada doesn't care and we care about that. We may sound anal but we believe thats the best for everyone. We can see the diffidence

Also for your information we have had two referendums in our history in 1980 and in 1995. Not every 5-6 years. The last referendums they voted 51% `No' and 49% 'Yes'

Stop insulting us before you know what happens

Izzie_23s avatar Izzie_23 Disagree -1Reply
@Izzie_23 Well that was rude! The reason we want a referendum is not because we want to keep our culture from disappearing...

It disgusts me that I can't celebrate Canada Day without hearing about the french in Quebec putting up Quebec flags instead. Canada is one of the best countries in the world, and if you are so unhappy with it? Leave. Not by separating a whole multicultural province, but by taking your ass somewhere else. Don't force immigrants to do anything. We are the only free country in the world that forces people not to speak a certain language. It's disgusting and it turns people off our province. Frankly, I don't blame them.

@God_ It disgusts me that I can't celebrate Canada Day without hearing about the french in Quebec putting up Quebec flags...

Why do you care that people aren't celebrating a holiday you celebrate? The Quebec could be doing way worse that sticking their flag in the air and waving it around. I love Canada and I love Quebec. Also when someone moves to the united states they expect to speak English since that is the language spoken there. You don't often see French schools and Spanish schools there. So why would people who move to Quebec and they know we speck French be any different? Believe what you believe and I will believe mine but remember. The Canadian identity comes mainly from Quebec

  • Maple syrup- Biggest producers in the world
  • Beaver- We exported beaver skins to France
    -Hockey- Made popular here
    -Snow -( I don't think Manitoba has much snow and Vancouver amount of snow is pathetic)
    And more
Izzie_23s avatar Izzie_23 Disagree -1Reply
@Izzie_23 Why do you care that people aren't celebrating a holiday you celebrate? The Quebec could be doing way worse that...

I just don't understand why Quebec is so ready to show the whole world that two nations can't live in harmony because of differences.

@maumau I just don't understand why Quebec is so ready to show the whole world that two nations can't live in harmony...

Its because the government has one mentality and Quebec has another. When the government tries to impose something that we don't agree with we cant just say okay fine. We have to be heard.
We cant bow down to all their demands so that everyone is happy but us.
Its not that we don't want to live in harmony because of difference its just that they don't seem to listen to us.

Izzie_23s avatar Izzie_23 Disagree -2Reply
@Izzie_23 Its because the government has one mentality and Quebec has another. When the government tries to impose something...

I totally agree with that, if only you were talking about the english in Quebec. Because that's EXACTLY what's happening to us.

@Izzie_23 Why do you care that people aren't celebrating a holiday you celebrate? The Quebec could be doing way worse that...

The difference between here and the states is that in the states, you're EXPECTED to learn English, not forced to. A comparison would be more like if a certain state forced you to speak a language that the rest of the country didn't. Now wouldn't that be ridiculous...

@God_ The difference between here and the states is that in the states, you're EXPECTED to learn English, not forced to...

Yes well here it is expected that immigrants would speak French since French is our official language. But immigrants would all send their kids to English school. So they made a law. Its only primary and secondary that you have to go in French then you are free to go to English schools and all. If you have parents or grandparents that went to English school or a parent in the military you can go to a public English school. If you really are desperate to go to an English school enroll in a private school.

Izzie_23s avatar Izzie_23 Disagree -2Reply
@Izzie_23 Yes well here it is expected that immigrants would speak French since French is our official language. But...

And what's wrong with immigrants sending their children to English school? By just learning the Quebecois french you are at such a disadvantage. English is the official language of more countries than any other language. Why anyone would deny someone the opportunity to learn it is beyond me. It goes back to the post-if you have to make laws to force people into your culture, it's already dead. Everything evolves.

@God_ And what's wrong with immigrants sending their children to English school? By just learning the Quebecois french...

You know that the state of California is trying to make a language law because of the increasing Latino population? They want to make it obligatory to speak English and they are getting praised for it while when we do it we get nothing but insults coming our way. We do not deny them the opportunity to learn. They get to learn the exact something as an English school. They get English lessons and they are not unhappy to live in French. The Provence gets the same grades as the rest of Canada. We do not deny the opportunity to learn. Also like I have said before, the immigrants know they are coming to a French Provence I am all for reasonable accommodations yet they should expect to go to school in French

Izzie_23s avatar Izzie_23 Disagree 0Reply
@Izzie_23 You know that the state of California is trying to make a language law because of the increasing Latino population?...

No. The english education in french high schools is not good enough, and the french (especially that bitch Marois) are always trying to make it seem even less important. The fact is, you need to learn english if you want to have a career that goes beyond Quebec. No one in the rest of the world gives a fuck about your language, culture or laws. They want someone who's educated and can easily travel internationally. If the french language and culture is so great, why do they have to legally force people into it? Let the world evolve naturally and allow people to make their own choices when it comes to language and education. We're a FREE country.

@God_ No. The english education in french high schools is not good enough, and the french (especially that bitch Marois)...

Well think what you think and say what you wish to say since I am tired of repeating myself. I think what they are doing is not a bad thing and you can choose to believe it is. They have the opportunity to work in France and if they really want it they can go to an English cegep and university. they will receive equal opportunity in the world even better since they can speak a second language. Also referring to one of my earlier points. California would not be part of the free country and they don't have a culture anymore since they intend to do the same. Also the state of Louisiana would be a French state if not for the government intervention so I guess they have no culture either. So everyone did it, I guess no one has a culture left

Links: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English-only_movement

Izzie_23s avatar Izzie_23 Disagree -1Reply

At first I laughed at your
over-generalizing naive stupidity. Then I noticed you were american and realized that this kind of thought is probably considered typical or even clever for you jackasses. So if my house gets broken into and I use violence to protect myself and the idea that I have a right to my safety then that idea is worthless? The government protects every single religious culture and it's right to be practiced, so I guess there isn't a single operating belief system that isn't already dead? You know what this feeling I have right now is? It's called second hand humiliation. I am humiliated simply because what you are expressing... Is that. Fucking. Stupid.

@John_MacTavish At first I laughed at your over-generalizing naive stupidity. Then I noticed you were american and realized that...

"At first I laughed at your
over-generalizing naive stupidity. Then I noticed you were american..."

So much stupid it hurts.

@Frank_n_Furter "At first I laughed at your over-generalizing naive stupidity. Then I noticed you were american..." So much...

...Yes? Oh... Shit. That was your whole response wasn't it? You literally had nothing clever or intelligent to say did you? You took time out of your day simply to insult someone anonymously over the Internet for having a different opinion. Ya youre probably in an intellectual position to call me stupid.

@John_MacTavish Yes? Oh... Shit. That was your whole response wasn't it? You literally had nothing clever or intelligent to say...

You just keep making stupid hypocritical comments and I'll just keep pointing them out. Yes, yes, you having a different opinion is 100% why I insulted you. It has nothing to do with the fact the insult was true. And actually, yeah, I am pretty intellectual. But I can see you meant for that to imply I'm stupid, and you must be so intelligent to insult an anonymous person on the internet goo smilie

@Frank_n_Furter You just keep making stupid hypocritical comments and I'll just keep pointing them out. Yes, yes, you having a...

Actually it's probably because you got butt hurt about the American comment, even when it's true most people tend to respond negatively to it. Haha actually... At 18. You don't know shit. You calling yourself intellectual to me is like when a 13 year old comes telling you the same. No one gives a shit, and every 18 year old in your generation tends to think they are gods gift to intelligent radical thinking, none of you are. Oh I see what your emoticon was trying to imply. Unforunately recognizing when what you say has no point or intellectual aim isn't an insult, just an observation. 'So much stupid it hurts' lacks even that focus

@John_MacTavish Actually it's probably because you got butt hurt about the American comment, even when it's true most people tend...

It's cute how you think age is an indicator of intellect. Ad hominem fallacy at it's finest. You're an idiot, they are not. Deal with it.

Anonymous +1Reply
Anonymous 0Reply
@John_MacTavish At first I laughed at your over-generalizing naive stupidity. Then I noticed you were american and realized that...

Hello, OP here. I don't believe I was the one overgeneralizing, looking at your response, you clearly do not understand the distinction between the example you provided (harm to person and property) and what I specifically said I meant - "culture." Yes, religion counts.
An example of government protecting "culture" is the illegality of same-sex unions in this fine country of ours (for someone so well informed about the mental capacity of our citizens, you certainly aren't too up-to-date about current events) because the religious right claims that it hurts their values of traditional marriage. If those values were truly strong and valid, they wouldn't need to be reinforced by making a group of people second-class citizens who are denied the privileges that same-sex unions have. Get my drift? There is no harm done to person or property by the gay community, and yet, we need to "protect marriage" from them.
Hope that cleared things up.

Anonymous +7Reply
@Hello, OP here. I don't believe I was the one overgeneralizing, looking at your response, you clearly do not...

You made an incredibly general post, then explained why in one instance it make sense. It probably had occasionally validity like most generalizations, but there's still often times when it doesn't make any sense. I would have been more open had you added something about gay marriage.

Anonymous