10A

It's a confluence of many factors, some of which I already listed, and instead of accepting and seeking knowledge, you rejected my explanation. I'm done replying to you here. Take care.

I know what nationalism is, thank you. I also know what American Exceptionalism is, and it's a well established doctrine, well rooted in fact. I might have failed to explain it well, or maybe you just didn't want to question your preconceived beliefs. Either way, American Exceptionalism is the real deal, and no amount of bickering over it could change my mind. Thank you, though, for sharing your perspective with me.

Here's the thing: I'm tired and headed to sleep. This has been a long and meandering conversation full of disagreements, with no real point. It's a bit exhausting. You're asking me about a topic that has been written about extensively in multiple books and articles. You can look up "American Exceptionalism" if you really want researched facts with academic citations. I was just giving you my honest thoughts, as a rather sleepy individual. I'm sorry those thoughts weren't up to snuff for you.

This interaction is done. You're obviously not a fan of the US, and if you don't live here anyway then you have every right not to be. It's no skin off my back. I wish you all the best. See ya around.

Ha, it's not fascist to click downvote. You wrote something I believed to be false, so I downvoted. If it really hurts your feelings I can take it back. I do enjoy mutually respectful debate. I don't think a downvote is all that disrespectful, and I also don't think we're having much of a debate. (What's the topic exactly?)

By what metric?

By a ton of metrics, but a few that come to mind off the top of my head:

• We're predominantly Christian, and that's not an official religion like in some other countries, but actual self-reported religious affiliation.
• People flock here from all over the world for our freedom, and always have since our inception.
• Our Constitution was the first to establish that God-given rights are the basis for a free people's self-governance, and that constitution has been imitated worldwide, though never paralleled.
• Our culture of self-defense makes us impossible to invade, because most people are armed and more than ready to take down attackers.
• We invented almost every useful technology that has been invented since our inception, including this here internet and the electrical generators that power it.
• We invented country music. 'Nuff said.

I understand that some citizens of various other countries see themselves as part of an interconnected global world, where countries are fungible. And to be fair, a few Americans think that too. But in reality the US is far removed from all other countries, and we're blessed with being the greatest country possible, so a foreign perspective really doesn't impact us at all.

So you're right to say I'm uninformed — indeed we all are, somewhat, depending on the holes in our areas of focus — but you're wrong to say my conclusions are not based on facts. Because my conclusions are entirely factual within the context of the US.

If I'm incorrect outside of that context, well okay, I'll take your word on that. But so? It just seems like such an irrelevant point to make.

That can be true or false. I neither know nor care. I'm sorry to be dismissive, and I don't mean to be rude. You're just trying to make a point that seems irrelevant to me. I'm sure it's meaningful to you, but it's not to me.

Perhaps — I have no idea about the rest of the world — but Fox serves an American audience, so that's the context in which it's appropriate to evaluate it.

As a conservative, when I look at the Fox News website, I typically think all of the following: A) these stories are notably well-balanced compared to the other mass media outlets, B) man, they publish some really stupid articles on this site, C) Why do the articles all have huge videos that are completely unrelated to the articles on top of them?, and D) Yikes, the comment section sure does feature some openly racist remarks sometimes.

But outside of Fox, in the US, there are generally two types of news organizations: large-and-leftist and tiny-and-conservative.

Agreed on that — I don't support force either. Ultimately it's up to Ernest.

I suspected as much.

So what are you doing in a conservative place? Did you come here just to pick a fight? I do enjoy our dialog, but the thing is called "conservative", so I expect everyone here to be some variant of conservative.

or else they become monopolies

Entirely false. Monopolies are always created with government assistance, erecting barriers to entry for competing startups.

slaves to corporations

Do you really believe that? We're all free to start our own companies, as I and most of my friends and family have at some point in our lives. That's the whole point of being an American. If you don't like your job, you're free to get another, and once you have some experience you can go into business for yourself. Nobody's a slave to a corporation. That's patently absurd.

Punishing drug addicts for being drug addicts does nothing to help them

Yeah but where did I ever suggest we should do that?

Correlation does not imply causation.

True. It's a multifaceted set of problems for sure. I do think the elimination of school prayer was a root cause, but that hunch is impossible to prove.

Secularism is not the problem here.

Secularism is always a problem, wherever it exists.

In the context of drug (including alcohol) abuse, the only method of treatment we have that's 100% effective is salvation. The only reason it's not universally offered as a known cure is because so many people are afraid to advocate for Christianity. But it works, and it works astonishingly well.

double jeopardy

I acquiesce this is technically correct. I didn't really mean it like that, exactly, but it's useless to belabor the point because we're beating a dead horse.

I would if I could. But that costs thousands of dollars,

Interesting. Where would you move, out of curiosity?

At times in the past I've mulled over starting a non-profit for the purpose of funding politically-oriented moves like this, where funds are granted to people of all political persuasions to relocate to a more politically appropriate place, and where funds are donated by people wanting to help accelerate that sorting process.

I wouldn't really start that non-profit, because ultimately it would distract from legitimately good charities, but it does cross my mind now and then.

and that’s assuming you find a good country that will take you in at all.

Yes, well this is also one of the reasons why all of my calls for deportation are unrealistic.

Deporting american citizens because they disagree with you is un-american. And it’s also a violation of the first amendment.

Agreed, but disagreeing with me is not the problem. I enjoy open disagreement, as I'm mostly enjoying this conversation with you. We can learn from engaging with people of differing perspectives.

When you talk about people who harbor a negative association with the American flag, though, that's far beyond a disagreement. You're talking about domestic terrorists there. They're absolutely not American at heart, so why would we allow them to live here? These are people who are likely to commit mass murder at the drop of a hat. I imagine there's probably less than a dozen such people nationwide.

Prayer in schools even if generic is still a form of forcing religion upon others.

Not whatsoever. There are a zillion denominations and factions of Christianity, and they're all welcome here, no matter how zany they are. Moreover, prayer is an open dialog with God, so almost all Christian prayers are fairly applicable to Jews and Muslims too, if they overlook a few words. That's the broadest acceptable spectrum of every religion in America. Bear in mind that we have the freedom of religion, not freedom from it.

That’s not at all what [the Pledge] says.

You're being overly literal. I know what the words to the Pledge are, thank you. I just recited it earlier today in church. What I meant was that it ultimately tells us to love our neighbors. That's the root meaning behind it.

Yikes, thank you for calling out me out on this. I definitely did not mean to threaten anyone. I see how it could have been interpreted that way though, so thank you! What I meant is that if this dispute is eventually to devolve into a literal war, I will go to battle to fight in favor of free speech. So it's not quite right to say I was hyperbolic, but at the same time I was certainly not threatening anyone.

Based on your last paragraph, it honestly sounds like you and I mostly agree on this topic. And yes, if kbin started shutting down objectionable magazines, I'd close my account.

As your final point, thank you, I take that as a complement, though I'm no TERF, by any means, and I understand you didn't mean it as a complement. I really do support free speech that genuinely and completely.