Vet cuts down Mexican flag
Mexican flags
Uploaded by dollarsandsense123
A response to this story in my coments section:
You know, I’m Mexican and people like the store-owners make me angry. They give a bad name to those of us who have assimilated and who want to be here. I still love my native country, but I would never fly their flag here? Why, because I am now for all purposes an American. I came here legally, I learned English, and I embrace this country as my new country.Sphere: Related ContentFlying your country’s flag over the one of the country that has provided you with work and money is idiotic. It’s okay to love your native country, but it’s NOT okay to flash any country’s flag in another country. *That* kind of disrespect is what makes people mad, and what made this man decide to take some action.
By doing this, these store-owners are just inciting more bigotry and xenophobia, reinforcing the notion that all Mexicans are like them. We are NOT all like them.
Anyway, I just wanted to let people know that not all immigrants are like these people. Some of us do things right, and some of us actually love this country.
![[Valid RSS]](http://politicalpartypoop.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/valid-rss.png "Validate my RSS feed")
October 5th, 2007 at 1:20 pm
Ya’ know, I think that vet’s response was kind of excessive. Obsessive nationalism is the equivalent of fascism. Assimilation is a sad state of affairs. I find it offensive that Americans find it necessary to undermine diversity and cultural pluralism by doing things like that. If the veteran took offense to the Mexican flag being placed above the American flag, he easily could have spoken to the shop owners. There are countless people who fly the confederate flag above the American flag. If one is to as belligerent about the flags as this individual, then those people should equal move to ban the creation, ownership, and representation of the confederate flag at all. I think that such laws as flag placement undermine individual rights and are a worthless burden on the American psyche and court systems. Stop violence, don’t create it.
And to the Mexican-American who commented…does “inciting” bigotry and xenophobia (despite the innocuous nature of the actions) justify bigotry or xenophobia. Regardless, stop selling your soul to Caucasia and have some opinions that represent your history, identity, and ancestry.
October 5th, 2007 at 2:27 pm
I’m leaving this comment here because I don’t think I can make a general comment on a blog:
So here’s where I stand…liberal politics is an affront to my intelligence, conservatism doesn’t even try to appeal to my intelligence–and conservative politics is devoid of intelligence. I trust neither. Politicians lie. That’s their job–they don’t exist to facilitate democracy, they exist to keep us dumb and happy. Nevertheless, I think excessively partisan politics undermine democracy in America. We should all be voting based upon the issues, not conservo-liberal politics. Neither party is going to give you what you need until you stop listening to them telling you what you need.
October 5th, 2007 at 3:42 pm
Obsessive nationalism. I pissed my pants.
True about the confederate flag, although saying that “countless” people fly it above the flag of the United Sates of America is bullshit. I was raised in the south, and don’t think I’ve ever seen that.
True about politics. Politicians lie. But where bigotry doesn’t justify bigotry, neither does does such a brilliant grasp of the conspicuously sad state of American politics, due to your superior intelligence, justify petty coercion like “…stop selling your soul to Caucasia and have some opinions that represent your history, identity, and ancestry.”
Bullshit heaped on bullshit is, let me see, oh yea, bullshit.
I can just say, Mr. De La Cruz, you have a bright future in politics.
October 5th, 2007 at 10:22 pm
Chris,
I don’t think I’m selling my soul to anyone. I’m giving my loyalty to the COUNTRY (not a particular race, as you allude by saying “caucasia”) that has provided me with good opportunities for my future.
I do agree with you that this man might have been a little rash in taking matters into his own hands. Also, I do not believe in defiling or demeaning anybody’s flag, whether it’s an American, Mexican, Russian, or What-Have-You flag.
Also, you don’t know me. Follow the link to my blog (click on my name, S.), and you’ll find out that I keep a lot of my traditions. I visit my family in Mexico often, I cook Mexican food, and I speak Spanish with my family because we don’t want the children to forget it. However, embracing new customs and traditions doesn’t mean I displace my own, it simply means I EXPAND my culture. I grow as a person.
Or, otherwise, what did you mean that I should do things that “represent my history, identity, and ancestry.” Should I wear a sombrero everywhere I go? Or should I refuse to speak anything else but Spanish? Besides, I am Mexican, but what do you know about my ancestry? Hispanic ancestry is very multiracial and multicultural.
No, by “inciting”, I did not mean that illegals are responsible for bigotry. Bigots are bigots without any reason but prejudice. But disrespect like this DOES *reinforce* prejudice against them. People who might have been neutral in the issue suddenly see this and think “You know what? These people *are* disrespectful and anti-American!”
You wouldn’t fly an American flag above the Mexican flag in Mexico, would you? People would be mad, with reason. So why do this in America?
October 6th, 2007 at 12:40 pm
explanation:
“Stop selling your soul to Caucasia and have some opinions that represent your history, identity, and ancestry”
What I am referring to is “S’s” statement “They give a bad name to those of us who have ASSIMILATED and who want to be here.” The fact is, assimilation, where I am concerned, is a complete subjugation of ones cultural, ethnic, or racial identity to that of the dominant group–in this case Anglo-Saxon White culture. Simply stating that you have “assimilated” is a linguistic cue to me–as a self-proclaimed non-assimilated black person–that you have done just that. All of the comments that you made afterwards speak to that same definition. I won’t continue to quote it, but go back and read your own comment, remove all referrals to your ethnicity, and ask yourself if it doesn’t sound like the voice of the fearful dominant white culture trying to protect itself from the machinations of Mexican culture. I do stand corrected, if you are maintaining your heritage, by my definition, you are not “assimilated” and therefore warrant my respect. I don’t respect people who give up their ethnicity to blend in with white society better–in order to benefit from white privilege. It’s a cop-out. Instead of moving to make bigots less bigoted, people who “assimilate” (by my definition) perpetuate disparities and prevent cultural pluralism.
And when I say Caucasia, I mean that there is an inherent component of this discourse which equates the national identity with Anglo-Saxon ancestry. There is a long standing American mythology which gives excessive credit to that racial history, and undermines the valuation of alternative histories. What I’m saying is don’t submit to the myth. Make sure you know what contributions people of your own ethnicity made to this country (whether that be German, Irish, Mexican, or whatever) and give due respect to that. If that shop owner happened to live in Texas, perhaps flying the Mexican flag over the American flag could have been a political statement–much in the same way that flying a French flag in New Orleans could be a political statement (at which point I could fully understand the “inciting” comment). At any rate, in such a political condition, I support the shop owner. Because we do not live in a historical vacuum. More happened between 1492 and 2007 than some British people came over, and Americans came out. The American flag, in many American’s imaginations represents just that. And while I cannot speak to any individuals genuine understanding and respect for the American flag, I do feel that if any disrespect occurred, the actions of the veteran justified such disrespect. By cutting down the American flag, rather than the Mexican flag, the vet essentially said that the shop owner ‘is not an American and should go back where he came from.’ Or in the least he stole the shop owners American identity. And that to me is not a right that anyone has. One’s flag representation should, in some sense, represent their identity. If the shop owner feels more Mexican than American (and after that fiasco he has all the more reason to feel that way) he should be able to say so openly and without fear of violent response. We are SUPPOSED to be a melting pot, and such actions do not encourage individuality.
Literally speaking, I don’t think it matters which flag is flying above the other. You have to give value to the symbol in order for it to mean anything. Chances are, the shop owner meant no insult by his actions.
October 6th, 2007 at 12:42 pm
And about the confederate flag flying above the American flag, perhaps it isn’t as common in the south as I might believe–but I’ve seen it here in the midwest. I wouldn’t have a problem with it if it weren’t for what the confederate flag tends to symbolize. But I’ve only been to the south twice, and I didn’t go anywhere a confederate flag could go (except Stone Mountain National Park…but I’ll leave that bs alone).
October 6th, 2007 at 11:25 pm
Chris I must tell you that I’m kinda surprised at your arrogance. It’s one thing to have strong opinions, but to have those opinions without understanding differing perspectives is grossly egotistical.
If I were not already well versed in liberal Negro hysterics I would find your rants more entertaining.
Insulting an individual and questioning his heritage, now that is original.
“Stop selling your soul to Caucasia”
Fascinating!
So here’s where I stand…liberal politics is an affront to my intelligence, conservatism doesn’t even try to appeal to my intelligence–and conservative politics is devoid of intelligence.
Please explain that one…
“I trust neither. Politicians lie.”
No shit, we are in a society where people hide true feelings and thoughts every day, mask aging with facial injections, engage in adultery, wear faux hair, fake tits, contact lenses, cheat on exams, lie on resumes, drive cars they can’t afford to impress others, lie to themselves.
So politicians are different than the masses how?
“I think excessively partisan politics undermine democracy in America.”
Spoken like an individual who is still trying to figure out what to think and how to think.
Good bad or indifferent, I have far more respect for people who stand up for their beliefs and don’t allow the prevailing winds and mysterious voices in the head to shift a persons true ideals and values.
“We should all be voting based upon the issues, not conservo-liberal politics.”
This is confusing, please explain, let me see if you believe that public funding of abortion is wrong, that taxes should not be raised, that we should protect our borders, the minimum wage should be raised, grant tax breaks to corporations, more funding for public schools, or school choice, whatever, doesn’t a persons political ideology reflect how we choose to vote for a particular representative?
“I find it difficult to believe that anyone could think that global warming is not a reality.”
Ok you are what 19, 20, 22 years of age, YOU know that global warming is a reality based on what exactly? When I was your age, global cooling was the clear and present danger.
Are you driving an older vehicle that is likely more damaging to the environment?
I find it amusing that more than a few young people, have tried to convince me of this global warming scam, while driving their daddies SUV or driving a vehicle without a muffler, using Albert Gore as the role model while he flies on a corporate jet to award ceremonies and uses more energy in a day that I would in a year.
Wow, being submerged in Caucasia and my “conservatism” has apparently limited my ability to process the obvious.
October 6th, 2007 at 11:51 pm
Chris,
I think I know where the disagreement between you and me stems from. I appreciate your clarifications, it helps to understand what you were trying to say
I think we have a different perception of what “assimilation” means. I view assimilation as a growth process. I do NOT believe that it means giving up something in exchange for something else. It simply means to acquire something new. I do not have to let go of my native culture/traditions in order to take in new ones. Who says I can’t speak BOTH English and Spanish? Who says I can’t celebrate both September 16th and the 4th of July? Who says I can’t eat both enchiladas and fried chicken? As far as I know giving up one isn’t a requirement for accepting the other. Also, as far as I have encountered (and maybe I have been lucky), maintaining these 2 cultures hasn’t meant rejection from any racial group. I have as many black friends, white friends, and Asian friends as I do Hispanic friends.
Well, I guess we can’t all agree on everything (who can?), but that is just my opinion and my perception of what “assimilating” means.
Thanks for the reply.
October 7th, 2007 at 10:39 am
Snoop, I’ve never claimed to not be a little arrogant…in fact in the last year I’ve made it a point to tell people early on that I do have a noticeable ego, and I welcome any chastisements for having one. It helps me to humble myself. Regardless, I explained the “Caucasia” comment, and I feel that my explanation is sufficiently informed for it not to be reduced to something as reductivist as “insulting an individual and questioning his heritage.” It’s not quite that simple, but if you choose to think of it as such, I can’t stop you. Perhaps you’re struggling to genuinely understand my perspective. I do see how my statement could be perceived that way, but that’s why I explained and apologized for the misinterpretation of “S’s” statements. I don’t want to insult someone’s heritage, or deny their ethnic identity. But anyone who denies their own ethnic identity is denying themselves. And you’re absolutely right, we are a nation of consuming liars. But who is supposed to be leading this nation? They say “attitude reflects leadership.” So perhaps we are who we are as citizens because our leadership promotes such lies. We can do “the chicken or the egg” debate considering the fact that this is a demockracy, but it all comes down to, we should not have politicians who lie. It puts us in a cultural hot bed. We can’t make properly informed opinions. We find ourselves choosing the lesser of all evils. And we deserve better than that. The fact is, I do stick to my TRUE ideals and values, but I know bullshit when I hear it. And I hear a lot of it in partisan politics. I am neither a Democrat, nor a Republican. I go with whatever party happens to appeal to what I believe in. And I am in a period of ideological shifts–isn’t that what college is for? But I know where my politics is NOT going, and I know what I will not submit to. To me, that is what counts today. I’ll figure the rest out tomorrow. Equally, I refuse to get rigid in my opinions. Conditions serve as the ultimate molder of opinions. If my environment changes, my dominant needs change. I can’t vote on all of my ideals, because no candidate will satisfy them all. But I can vote whichever ones are the most important at any given time. I’m waiting on my poli-sci friends to run. Then I can get all of my ideals…hopefully. Okay, “conservo-liberal politics”…I’m sure you are aware that Democrats and Republicans were at one time one political party. I’m sure you know that in the 50’s and 60’s, the political roles were reversed. Neither conservative politics nor liberal politics is strict in its adherence to their classical ideologies. Conservatives proper should believe in small government. So why would a conservative vote for the patriot act? Liberals proper should believe in individualism. So why would any liberal believe in socialized anything? The differences in conservative and liberal politics are largely semantics. To me it seems that it is manufactured, it is a system created to create the illusion that there is a difference between two candidates (which even in reality there always will be) but the differences, at times are no more drastic than between a Republican that leans right and a Republican that leans left, or a Democrat that leans right or a Democrat that leans left. The definitions of conservative and liberal are far too fluid to say that their is a real difference. It’s all a facade. It all gets back to , once again, getting votes. I realize that there aren’t many third party candidates worth America’s attention, but how many third party candidates have been in a televised presidential debate? Since the end of the League of Women Voter’s reign in politics abruptly ended? Why do they let politicians give non-answers in the televised debates? And why is it that John Kerry and George Bush were treated as the only names on the ballot? They weren’t! There were others. The voices are silenced. The reason for that is because it is mutually in the interest of the Democratic and the Republican party to create a wall of wealth between them–as proponents of bi-partisan politics–and any other candidate, no matter what the third option has to say. I wish I could think of a good third party candidate, but frankly, I can’t. I don’t hear about them until long after the elections. But imagine that the candidate you support didn’t get the Republican nomination–they didn’t make it through the primaries, or they hadn’t raised the damn near a billion dollars it’s gonna take to be a contender–but they chose to ride the third-party ticket, would you still vote for them, or would you vote for the Republican nominee? Wouldn’t it piss you off when they wouldn’t include your candidate in the debates, because the debates are funded by a bi-partisan constituency rather than a non-partisan organization (like it’s supposed to be). As for global warming…we’ll see who’s right someday. To assume that it’s false, is to assume that scientists are lying. But it wouldn’t be the first time scientists have made something up. So neither one of us is in any position to PROVE either wrong. So, I’ll leave you alone in that respect. It’s a debate I can’t win. I genuinely believe that it is real, and apparently you genuinely believe that it isn’t. I don’t drive an suv, and I have no clue what kind of mileage I get. But I do know that I’m not doing enough to curb those effects, so I have no right to say shit to anyone. Even the average H3 driver. (however I’ll complain left and right that those sons of bitches take up too much road!) And I’m not a newbie on the global warming bandwagon. I’m not one of those fad environmentalists. (and those bastards piss me off a lot). I’ve been relatively environmentally conscious for years. I haven’t even seen Albert Gore’s movie yet. If it’s all cgi, I’m not sure I want to. I realize that there is conflicting evidence in the scientific community regarding global warming. One side says we’re melting the ice caps (there are some good BBC articles about Britain’s erosion problems from rising tides, read those if you genuinely doubt that the water levels are rising or the ice caps are melting) the other side says that we’re saving ourselves from an ice age. But since when has the scientific community been 100% in agreement on any issue? Matter of fact, we can only pick a side and see if we can prove it right or wrong. But I think mother nature can speak for herself. Water levels are rising, but the continents are not. One could argue that “global warming” is not the cause of that, but I challenge anyone with that stance to tell me what is. Not believing in something because you personally haven’t seen evidence of it–when others have–is foolhardy. Sometimes, we simply have to take others word on large matters. We have to question it, but we shouldn’t simply reject a critical idea because we love our cars and our heavy pollutant factories. And though we might be in the habit of thinking in human time, we should think of global warming and such in geological time. I don’t think that the ice caps will melt in just ten years–that’s just dumb. But could it in 100? 200? How long did it take for us to jump up one degree? How many degrees will it take for us to melt the ice caps? Were we right the first time–will all those gases in our skies instead descend us into the ice age we thought we’d avoided? I’m not a scientist. I don’t have the answers. But I’m no fool. I’ll continue to keep my eyes open to the possibilities in both ways. But it doesn’t hurt at all to ACT like global warming exists. It only means cleaner air if it doesn’t. I imagine my stance to be rather practical. The alternative, sadly may or may not be. But for every action there’s an equal and opposite reaction, so what is the reaction our environment must have to our pumping of greenhouse gases into the air?
Nevertheless, I see where your opinions come from. And they seem to be pretty cynical (not to say that mine aren’t). While perhaps you took one cynical path, I took the other. My “liberal Negro hysterics” is not a far cry from your “conservative negro hyterics,” and if you listen closely, you just might find a point of synthesis.
Oh, and I missed this earlier, “it’s one thing to have strong opinions, but to have those opinions without understanding differing perspectives…” is pure presumption. To assume that my dissent represents ignorance is false. I contend that I do understand, well enough to know that I disagree. I think that I’ve restrained myself from countless potential insults (though I’m not in the common practice of simply slinging insults anyway). I generally write in layers, with some statements requiring a particular background to fully comprehend. If you’re not on my plane, then perhaps you’ll miss the nuance. But that does not at all mean that I’m ignorantly condescending. I usually mean SOMETHING, not simply insult. Here’s my ego: simple insult is beneath me. I have better things to do with my time and my mind than just blindly insult people. Give what I’ve said another look. Maybe YOU might understand ME better if you didn’t reduce my thoughts to hysterics.
October 7th, 2007 at 1:00 pm
There was a shitload of caucasian corpses on both sides of the Civil War. There are descendants of confederate soldiers who have not completely assimilated. I guess the Confederate flag signifies that, but I want you to tell me where you have seen the Confederate colors flying above the US colors. I want to visit this place.
Underlying my reaction to your comments is the growing combative ideology that Mexican people somehow have an inalienable right to a great part of the Southwestern United States. I’m not sure which flavor of the Latino heritage enjoys the most valid birthright. Is it the the marauding Spanish conquerors or the virgin sacrificing indigenous indians?
Whichever, I agree with the spirit of some of your comments, but the habit of writing off America as the land of caucasia ignores the cultural sacrifices that white people have given to this country.
October 8th, 2007 at 1:59 pm
Ya know, I wish I could remember where those Confederate Colors were flying above the star spangled banner, but I don’t remember. I’ve seen it in Kansas, though. I know there’s a house that has a little American flag on the front porch and the entire east wall of the house has a confederate flag on it, if that satisfies your curiosity. But really, I was more offended by the confederate flag than its placement, so I made no effort to remember location.
There’s a lot of irony in referring to the Spanish conquerors as “marauders” in a nation of marauding British conquerors. And I don’t see why virgin sacrificing indigenous indians are to be deplored any more than genocide practicing Europeans? Either way, evil is practiced. So if your concern is who is moral enough to stake their claims on the Southwestern United States…probably no one. Regardless, it’s conquered territory at present. It was purchased with the blood of American citizens, at the expense of the blood of Mexican citizens. At the time that territory was taken it belonged to the mixed Spanish, indigenous, AFRICAN peoples in what was then called Mexico. While I wish I could give credit to pre-colonial Mexico, they didn’t have what we think of as political boundaries. And as far as our existing system is concerned, anything pre-political boundaries is invalidated. Ethical discussion regarding how valid that is really doesn’t deserve my effort–but it is kinda unethical.
I acknowledge the sacrifices that white people have given to this country, that’s WHY it is Caucasia. There has yet to be a war in defense of the United States (that is defense, not offense) that is transracial. White people were historically fighting for their own White nation–in EVERY circumstance. That includes the Civil War. The Civil War was as much about slavery as it was about interpretations of the constitution–which was a very hard realization for me to come to terms with. The white southerners fought to keep slavery and oppression. The white northerners fought to end slavery…but keep oppression. Probably the only pocket of genuine American ideals was the Reconstruction…and that ended rather abruptly as politics destroyed equality. I don’t seek to discredit the valiant sacrifices of white Americans (not to mention that black people have fought on both sides of every war the US has fought), but I refuse to let anyone valorize the motives of people who were certainly not acting altruistically. Lincoln didn’t WANT to end slavery, and most of the Union soldiers didn’t give a damn about it. They fought out of pure patriotism. The purest blind patriotism. Which is respectable, but not noble.
October 8th, 2007 at 11:00 pm
Chris,
I refer to the “cultural” sacrifices that white people have made. The assimilation that leads people like you to shrug off the ethnic diversity of people with white skin. Believe me, the anonymous white caucasia can be a motherfucker even to white caucasions. Assimilation is not my favorite subject. Melting pot is an insult to every culture that contributes to the richness of our conjoined culure. I prefer salad bowl. But immigrating to this country should compel, at minimum, a loyalty to the United States. That this is bowing to the gods of “white caucasia” is my problem. It is pledging allegiance to the land of the free and the home of the brave. (A bit over the top, yes, but just for discussion’s sake).
I’m not sure I could or would argue most of your points. My mind is feeble and my ways are set. A friend and I have an ongoing discussion that no matter the depth of historical knowledge one possesses, each man’s opinion will have personal experience at its core.
Most descendants of slaves have roots in this country deeper than mine. I’m only third generation, but what is interesting about that (to me, anyway) is I have actually met my slave ancestors. 30 years after the Emancipation Proclamation, my Aunt Nellie and my Aunt Anna came to this country as indentured servants. They lived their lives cleaning chamberpots, and died in poverty. I recently had occasion to drive by the estate in Baltimore where they both worked, and the same family lives there. I almost stopped in to see if anyone needed an asswiping.
But if you want to balance moral superiority with ethnicity (not saying you do, but if you did), it might pay to take a look at the continent on which slavery prevails to this day.
Yes, Africa.
October 9th, 2007 at 9:40 pm
Okay. I follow now. I completely agree with the “salad bowl” thing, but I used “melting pot” because it is the rhetorically correct term. Everyone’s familiar with it and most people don’t take issue with it. So peachy. No one should be “loyal to the United States,” but everyone should be loyal to the normative ideologies that it was founded on. If the country isn’t being loyal to you–as a citizen–why in the hell should you burden yourself with loyalty to it. For example, how destitute do I need to be to feel like the draft doesn’t apply? If I don’t believe that the government has the right to spy on me without just cause, do I have to accept it without question? When do laws go too far? Do I have to pay taxes if I can barely afford food? Health care? A car? Life insurance? Gas? I disagree with the implications of Kennedy’s statement: “ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.” If my country has done little for me, and everyone has to admit that America has failed many people, what level of loyalty do I owe to the state itself. My answer is none. The founding fathers didn’t expect us to be loyal to the state, but loyal to the founding ideals. If the state isn’t following them, we shouldn’t have to pander to it. And then reality hits, I go to jail for draft dodging and not paying my taxes. So, I guess loyalty has its perks.
I didn’t get the Africa thing though? It seems non sequitur.
October 10th, 2007 at 9:25 pm
Well, we are not going to agree on the slave raping founding fathers and their expectations.
My core point is - and thanks for re-enforcing it, by the way - that there is no ethnic moral superiority. We can all look at our ethnic backgrounds with equal measures of pride and horror no matter who we are. No exceptions.
You are disengaging for reasons that I completely understand, but I believe that disengagement is the last thing we need these days. We are a country of laws. We are bound only by allegiance. That is all we have.