views on american flag burning

[anti_fash]

Hello board.

Im not sure where to post this but i think that its most suited here.

Im interest to see what everybodies view on flag burning. Heres some links to show exactly what i meen.

[ManyAntsDefeatSpiders]

Flag burning is protected by the American constitution is it not?

It is not a privilege all countries enjoy...

So burn it as often as possible!

[anti_fash]

I dont really think that flag burning proves anything i dont like american or british policies im not proud to be part of the british flag but i wouldnt burn it because i know some flags meen something to some people even if there views differs from mine.

[mikelepore]

All national flags and national anthems are disgusting. All of them represent the claim that human beings should exist to serve inanimate objects. They symbolize the idea that, in the event of any conflict between the population and an institution, sacrifice the population and save the institution.

"And so, my fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country." -- John F. Kennedy, 1961 inaugural speech

That is a most depraved and perverted remark.

[AGITprop]

All national flags and national anthems are disgusting.

Except the Internationale, but I guess you can argue its not a national anthem, is it.

And of the versions in English, the British one reigns supreme over the watered down American one.

[Forward Union]

It's generally better to fly your own flag as opposed to burn someone elses.

Especially one associated in popular culture with Freedom, Liberty and Democracy. Burning it doesn't show that you don't think the US represents those things, wheras your cause does. To most It just says "I hate liberty Freedom democracy"

So it's a crap idea.

[chegitz guevara]

It's an unnecessary provocation.

[anti_fash]

All national flags and national anthems are disgusting. All of them represent the claim that human beings should exist to serve inanimate objects. They symbolize the idea that, in the event of any conflict between the population and an institution, sacrifice the population and save the institution.



That is a most depraved and perverted remark.
I think you have extremely blown that out of preportion there.

[anti_fash]

It's generally better to fly your own flag as opposed to burn someone elses.
.

Good post

[razboz]

It's generally better to fly your own flag as opposed to burn someone elses.

Especially one associated in popular culture with Freedom, Liberty and Democracy. Burning it doesn't show that you don't think the US represents those things, wheras your cause does. To most It just says "I hate liberty Freedom democracy"

So it's a crap idea.


I'd go ahead and say that this is a pretty fair comment.

having said that though, i'd have to add that flags and the institutions they represent are attempts to extract the individual from his context within humanity and place him within the context of a nation-state. the nation is an obsolete concept and flags and national anthems represent an attempt to militarise the common citizen.

in conclusion: gratuitous flag-burning should be avoided, but overall flag-burning as a symbol of non-comformity accompanied by a propositive and constructive action is something that should be encouraged.

[joe_the_red]

Sometimes a harsh message is what it takes to wake people up. Saying that we shouldn't burn the flags of imperialist states is, to me, far too accomodating to these fascists. I too am opposed to flags an anthems of NATIONS, but what a "nation" is suppose to do, is to represent a culture. There are songs that are purely cultural, and symbols that are the same. I am in no way opposed to that, and am quite opposed to burning a symbol of culture. The point is, though, that the U.S. and British Empire flags are not a symbol of culture. Conformity in these locations is fascist and anti-culture, anti-society. I live in the United States. I was born here. I have many ancestors from Ireland, and I consider my culture to be Irish, and have intention of returning there to work for my people. Not this nation that I was unfortunate enough to be born into. And please don't tell me "it could be worse", because that's what the capitalists have been saying for far too long, and every time that something stupid happens and someone says that, I just want to knock their teeth out. So please... humor me and avoid that, as a request. But anyways, these empires are doing much worse than flag burning to the populations of this world. They are terrorising the Middle-East and their own citizens, among others. The British Empire is still terrorising my people, and until the U.S. and Brits stop all of their crimes of humanity, I will spit on their flags, tear them up, and burn them. Symbol of freedom and liberty? Only to the ignorant. -Joe

[chegitz guevara]

The American flag very much is a symbol of the American nation. Don't think that because it is also an imperial flag that it doesn't have a deep resonance with the American people. It's practically a sacred object to a huge chunk of the population. When you burn it, you're spitting on these people, and we want to win them over, not spit on them.

[mario_buda]

all flags should be burnt.

[chegitz guevara]

Give a hoot, don't pollute!

[Dros]

Flag burning can be a symbolically powerful statement about the country.

[joe_the_red]

Would you burn a Nazi Germany flag? It was a powerful and important symbol to a lot of people in its time, and to some still today. I consider the U.S. and British Empire flags no different. When they are no longer capitalist-fascist-imperial scum, I will then decide it is no longer right to burn them. -Joe

[Faux Real]

Piss on a burning flag for good measure.

[Post-Something]

I think it's a God darn swell idea.

[The Advent of Anarchy]

To burn or not to burn? That is the question.
Go ahead if you want. It's a good form of protest, and you can keep a pole attached and use it as a torch to keep the pigs away when your Black Bloc and the Police clash.

[F9]

The best would be a fireplace to throw in all national flags and burn.The us flag some times has and its meaning to burn it,on a strike against the wars in front of american "house"(i dont know how to say it in english) sometimes it gives a statement.So i am not against it!

Fuserg9:star:

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

Especially one associated in popular culture with Freedom, Liberty and Democracy. Burning it doesn't show that you don't think the US represents those things, wheras your cause does. To most It just says "I hate liberty Freedom democracy"


Not where I'm from.
I recently attended a show where the vocalist/songwriter/composer said, I can't believe you folks go outside (it was outdoor show) like this, with out any protection, while they're (US) dropping bombs all over the place. You're all in great peril. Now we're going to play the anthem of war, for you to know the dangers you're running." Then they played the star spangled banner while pointing their guitars at the audience like riffles.

[Tower of Bebel]

The American flag very much is a symbol of the American nation. Don't think that because it is also an imperial flag that it doesn't have a deep resonance with the American people. It's practically a sacred object to a huge chunk of the population. When you burn it, you're spitting on these people, and we want to win them over, not spit on them.

I like this (controversial?) arguement.

Imperialism - the "international bourgeosie" - with (the) America(n nation) as its main guardian, is so strong that no nation can ever be (for 100%) independant (even the United States). As long as the US is the most important defender of imperialism - in this case the surpressor of many different peoples - many will say the stars and stripes only represent oppressive imperialism, not freedom and independance.
And as long as the US supresses other peoples many Americans won't be free; they'll follow the laws and rules of its own bourgeoisie - which is the strongest defender of the interests of imperialism -, and they will be offended by flag burning instead of being comprehensive and understanding.

But is it possible for the US to end the suppresion of other peoples? I think not. The nation is so strong and important for global capitalism that it will need to keep it's role as the guardian of imperialism. The peoples of the US will never be totally free, they'll always be a supressor - and surpressors only serve the bourgeoisie. The only solution is, of course, (the struggle for) socialism.

[Zurdito]

depends on the situation. the burning US flag is a symbol of resistance for the oppressed peoples of the third world. In some circumstances, to show solidarity with all nations oppressed by the US, it would be a good thing to do. In fact, to oppose their right to burn the flag of the state which is the primary upholder of and beneficiary from the imperialist system which keeps the majority of the world's population in abject poverty, is to spit on them.

on a protest where you are in the USA and trying to unite a broad consensus of workers around, say a trade union issue, it may not be a good thing to do.

it all depends, you see.

[Thíazì]

I wonder what the reaction would be if someone were to burn a flag in celebration of the very freedom to do so. By burning a flag one could say that he's celebrating the liberty to do it, and the struggle for further civil liberties. I don't see why flag burning is always viewed and done as angry and negative when it mustn't always be.

[anti_fash]

Like i have said before i think it sick and totally unacceptable to burn anyflag unless it was a flag like a nazi flag. (And lets be honist how often do you see them flying everysingle day) I dont think it proves anything.

[quevivafidel]

I think I'd rather burn down the media (FOX News, CNN, NBC headquarters) than the U.S. flag. You know what was the special on the news last night--footage on Jenna Bush's (one of the Bush twins) elaborate and luxurious wedding and her expensive dress, earrings, etc. Dios mio!!

But getting back to the flag, I wouldn't really care one way or another if it were burned, but it would seem to be more of a publicity stunt than an actual protest. I think there are better ways to get your point across against American imperialism than to set the flag on fire.

But if you set it on fire, set Israel's flag on fire, too.

P.S.: mikelepore, I've always joked that Kennedy's line should have been, "Ask not what you can do for your country, but what your country can do for you." (We were voting to elect this guy, after all, with the mindset that we'd get something back from the country!)

[Pawn Power]

Not where I'm from.
I recently attended a show where the vocalist/songwriter/composer said, I can't believe you folks go outside (it was outdoor show) like this, with out any protection, while they're (US) dropping bombs all over the place. You're all in great peril. Now we're going to play the anthem of war, for you to know the dangers you're running." Then they played the star spangled banner while pointing their guitars at the audience like riffles.

Indeed. The meaning of flag burning depends on the context and the audience. Certainly, if a flag is US flag is burnt a G8 protest, most protesters will assume it symbolism against US imperialism, Americanization, Globalization , etc. Viewers watching it in the US might relate in to general anti-Americanism or even, as Wat points out, anti-freedom. Ironically, it are those same people that want the freedom to burn flags made illegal.

[Red_or_Dead]

National flags = bad

Conclusion = get rid of them

How?= Burn them

[davidbrooke]

Recently some schoolkids in Salford organised a protest against the closing down of "St. George's" High School. The girls asked all the residents to pick up the flag they bought during the world cup and bring it outside with them as a message of protest. In this sense it was progressive and very humorous.

In this context, it was a brilliant method of mobilising the community. The flag became a symbol of "progressive patrioism", in the sense that we're proud of our community and want to improve it, and save it from New Labour attacks. The flag idea did appeal to working class people.

Whenever I see someone burning a flag, I don't think it actually furthers the cause. It doesn't extend consciousness with working people, and for me this is hte most important thing we need to do at the moment.

[joe_the_red]

In my opinion, the U.S. flag is a symbol of capitalism, fascism, and imperialism and just as bad as the Nazi flag. -Joe

[turquino]

I think it's good to burn the american flag. The american flag is a symbol of the slavery, genocide, and imperialism that built america. The rest of the world looks at the american flag and sees a crass culture that worships shallow consumerism and nasty jingosim. Publically burning an american flag probably incenses many patriotic americans, but so what?:cursing: Americans will need to reject their chauvinistic culture and come on over to our camp. It's better to be outspoken among americans than water down the political rhetoric and hope a couple more will pick the right side.

-turquino

[chegitz guevara]

I don't have an issue with people outside the United States burning our flag. We're an imperial country. The oppressed have a right to destroy the symbols of their oppression.

Within the United States it's a different matter. The reaction that was set off when an RCP comrade burnt a flag in the late 80s is still with us today.

Whatever message you are trying to send when you burn a flag is lost. No one will hear it. All that people will see is you burning a flag.

Reality is not so simple and one sided. It isn't black and white. Dialectics tells us that reality is full of contradictions and change. You need to understand that many working people will shut you out when you fuck with their flag. Symbols belong to whomever claims them, and just as much as Old Glory is a symbol of oppression, it is also a symbol of freedom, of democracy, of sacrifice for a better world. Reality doesn't mean shit when it comes to symbols. They are artificial, they exist only in the mind. Your view of a symbol is no more valid than anyone else's.

In the United States, burning and American flag is an unnecessary provocation. I'm not a big fan of provocations, and I'm especially opposed to unnecessary ones. Let's work to win people over, not piss them off so that instead of joining us, they fight us.

As for the ludicrous notion that the U.S. is as bad as Nazi Germany, you're off your fucking nut. If we were in Nazi Germany we wouldn't be having this conversation, unless it was in a concentration camp, in line for the showers.

[ManyAntsDefeatSpiders]

I wonder what will happen when you tell them you want to abolish their White House.

Or remove the power of capital.

Would you similarly refuse to put forth such arguments in fear of provoking?

Our ideology is one which inherently provokes and strikes at the very heart of what American society is.

That being said, I can understand how it upsets Americans. Why it upsets them should really be what is questioned and attacked by us.

[joe_the_red]

You're entitled to your opinion. Just because the U.S. isn't the same as Nazi Germany doesn't mean it's just as bad, or worse. It's just as imperial, only they get away with it by using definitions and media. Just because it's not the same bad doesn't mean it's not just as bad. -Joe

[ManyAntsDefeatSpiders]

Modern America has not systematically set about to exterminate an entire race, on no more merit than they were what they were.

They certainly have engaged, started and spread wars which have claimed millions of lives; from Korea, Vietnam to present day Iraq.

Yet the reasoning behind such things is not racism (although that's not to say there was/is no racism towards those groups) but rather the result of capitalism wanting to expand its nexus.

There is certainly something quite different between a government systematically killing a population owing to the mere chance of their 'race' and a government killing people incidental to the expansion of capital.

One is genocidal capitalism, one is just plain old capitalism.

[QuestForLiberty]

I say flag burning is a great release, especially for angry teenagers like myself. As long as one does it in a way in which it wont offend patriots. afterall, many of them are simply ignorant to the atrocities that America commits on a regular basis.

To Many Ants Defeat Spiders: thats probably the coolest name ever.

[joe_the_red]

So the United States of America has never committed genocide?
...
In the past, the main thrust of the Holocaust/Genocide Project's magazine, An End To Intolerance, has been the genocides that occurred in history and outside of the United States. Still, what we mustn't forget is that mass killing of Native Americans occurred in our own country. As a result, bigotry and racial discrimination still exist.

"In 1492, Columbus sailed the ocean blue"*.*.*.*and made the first contact with the "Indians." For Native Americans, the world after 1492 would never be the same. This date marked the beginning of the long road of persecution and genocide of Native Americans, our indigenous people. Genocide was an important cause of the decline for many tribes.

"By conservative estimates, the population of the United states prior to European contact was greater than 12 million. Four centuries later, the count was reduced by 95% to 237 thousand.

In 1493, when Columbus returned to the Hispaniola, he quickly implemented policies of slavery and mass extermination of the Taino population of the Caribbean. Within three years, five million were dead. Las Casas, the primary historian of the Columbian era, writes of many accounts of the horrors that the Spanish colonists inflicted upon the indigenous population: hanging them en mass, hacking their children into pieces to be used as dog feed, and other horrid cruelties. The works of Las Casas are often omitted from popular American history books and courses because Columbus is considered a hero by many, even today.

Mass killing did not cease, however, after Columbus departed. Expansion of the European colonies led to similar genocides. "Indian Removal" policy was put into action to clear the land for white settlers. Methods for the removal included slaughter of villages by the military and also biological warfare. High death rates resulted from forced marches to relocate the Indians.

The Removal Act of 1830 set into motion a series of events which led to the "Trail of Tears" in 1838, a forced march of the Cherokees, resulting in the destruction of most of the Cherokee population." The concentration of American Indians in small geographic areas, and the scattering of them from their homelands, caused increased death, primarily because of associated military actions, disease, starvation, extremely harsh conditions during the moves, and the resulting destruction of ways of life.

During American expansion into the western frontier, one primary effort to destroy the Indian way of life was the attempts of the U.S. government to make farmers and cattle ranchers of the Indians. In addition, one of the most substantial methods was the premeditated destructions of flora and fauna which the American Indians used for food and a variety of other purposes. We now also know that the Indians were intentionally exposed to smallpox by Europeans. The discovery of gold in California, early in 1848, prompted American migration and expansion into the west. The greed of Americans for money and land was rejuvenated with the Homestead Act of 1862. In California and Texas there was blatant genocide of Indians by non-Indians during certain historic periods. In California, the decrease from about a quarter of a million to less than 20,000 is primarily due to the cruelties and wholesale massacres perpetrated by the miners and early settlers. Indian education began with forts erected by Jesuits, in which indigenous youths were incarcerated, indoctrinated with non-indigenous Christian values, and forced into manual labor. These children were forcibly removed from their parents by soldiers and many times never saw their families until later in their adulthood. This was after their value systems and knowledge had been supplanted with colonial thinking. One of the foundations of the U.S. imperialist strategy was to replace traditional leadership of the various indigenous nations with indoctrinated "graduates" of white "schools," in order to expedite compliance with U.S. goals and expansion.

Probably one of the most ruinous acts to the Indians was the disappearance of the buffalo. For the Indians who lived on the Plains, life depended on the buffalo. At the beginning of the nineteenth century, there were an estimated forty million buffalo, but between 1830 and 1888 there was a rapid, systematic extermination culminating in the sudden slaughter of the only two remaining Plain herds. By around 1895, the formerly vast buffalo populations were practically extinct. The slaughter occurred because of the economic value of buffalo hides to Americans and because the animals were in the way of the rapidly westward expanding population. The end result was widescale starvation and the social and cultural disintegration of many Plains tribes.

Genocide entered international law for the first time in 1948; the international community took notice when Europeans (Jews, Poles, and other victims of Nazi Germany) faced cultural extinction. The "Holocaust" of World War II came to be the model of genocide. We, as the human race, must realize, however, that other genocides have occurred. Genocide against many particular groups is still widely happening today. The discrimination of the Native American population is only one example of this ruthless destruction.
-Sharon Johnston, The Genocide of Native Americans: A Sociological View, 1996
...
So, quite frankly, yes, the United States has committed genocide. -Joe

[ManyAntsDefeatSpiders]

It seems you missed an important point:

Me:
Modern America has not systematically set about to exterminate an entire race, on no more merit than they were what they were.

[joe_the_red]

Just how modern are we talking? Because during World War 2, it could be argued that the United States were treating Japanese people and even Japanese-Americans similar to the Jews in Germany. Granted, it wasn't outright death camps, but I'm sure plenty of Japanese died in the camps that the U.S. sent them to. Additionally, I suppose that it could be argued that the United States is committing something of a slow, 'cautious' genocide of the Iraqi people, based on how many times this country has attacked them. Do I think it's genocide? Not necessarily, but nobody knew that the Nazis were doing it until the end of the war, and perhaps the United States isn't being so obvious about it. But then again, I don't know these things, and do not claim to, I'm merely posing a possibility, not necessarily an argument. -Joe

[ManyAntsDefeatSpiders]

Just how modern are we talking?

During the last hundred years when imperialism really started to get on the move (not to say it wasn't happening before that - it was, just not on the scale of World War One for example).


Because during World War 2, it could be argued that the United States were treating Japanese people and even Japanese-Americans similar to the Jews in Germany. Except they didn't eliminate them.

They interned them for fear of aiding the Japanese government.


Granted, it wasn't outright death camps, but I'm sure plenty of Japanese died in the camps that the U.S. sent them to.Plenty meaning ten thousand? A million? Were they gassed?


Additionally, I suppose that it could be argued that the United States is committing something of a slow, 'cautious' genocide of the Iraqi people, based on how many times this country has attacked them.No they are not.

Their endeavours in Iraq was not to destroy the Iraqi people as a 'race', but to expropriate Iraq's wealth and all the strategic benefits of having a USA-sympathetic country in the Middle East.


Do I think it's genocide? Not necessarily, but nobody knew that the Nazis were doing it until the end of the war, and perhaps the United States isn't being so obvious about it.They did know about it prior to the end of the second World War.

I distinctly remember Roosevelt (or was it another head of state) refusing to bomb train-lines, even when he knew that such train lines would be used in facilitating the killings of Jews and other 'degenerates.'

We certainly know that the USA is torturing prisoners, guilty or otherwise.

But we have no proof that they are systematically gassing Iraqis.


But then again, I don't know these things, and do not claim to, I'm merely posing a possibility, not necessarily an argument.Right.

America does not have to be labelled as genocidal, or compared with Nazi Germany to make your point any more valid.

It generally makes the arguments seem weak on its merits and arguing by way of wrong analogy.

And there is the chance that you are actually downplaying and trivialising the Holocaust by representing it to the invasion of Iraq, which whilst we all condemn as barbaric, is simply not on the same level as systematic mass killings.

[joe_the_red]

If the war had gone on longer, who knows what would have happened. The Nazis didn't immediately begin with killing. "Fascism is capitalism in decay." And as such, one must have capitalism first. Fascism will always be a product of capitalism that lasts too long. As greed, money-worship, and elitism becomes more and more promonent, the elite will use what they have to bring about fascist ideology. The BNP is growing more powerful in modern times. I can only expect that in the near future, a major fascist party will likely emerge in the U.S., too... unless, of course, some positive change is made. The U.S. and Britain are heading down the paths that Germany was headed down, not for the same reasons, but none-the-less. -Joe

[Ultra-Violence]

I remember when i burned my first american falg i was at a protest and we had the american flag upside down with a bunch of writing on it when a couple of fellow anarchist came and set it on fire while me and a another person were holding it. i was fucking scared out fo my mind while this was happening becuase i thought i was goana get arested (didnt know it wasnt ilegal) but after it bruned we steped on it and spit on it. this was at an anti war protest i was 15 at the time. What exactly did this accomplish? i have no fucking idea what it accomplished to tell you the truth BUT for us anarchist and commies at the protest it was us saying FUCK YOU! to the MAN! but to other protesters the more moderate people were highly offended and lots of people were shocked as well im not saying dont brun the American flag cause ive burned many and defiled them in plenty of ways BUT!!! we have to be conciouse of our actions and when is it and appropiate time and when its not a so good time and how all of our actions reflects on all of us leftist around the world so if they see a bunch of idiots fuckng shit up thats what their goana think about us im not going really anywhere with this is just that lots of leftis forget that were like the only 2% of the population that think and believe the things we do. the rest havent even heard of our ideas or even know what the hell they are and if they do its some twisted bullshit form of what it really is. SO THINK BEFORE U ACT!

[Plagueround]

We certainly know that the USA is torturing prisoners, guilty or otherwise.

But we have no proof that they are systematically gassing Iraqis.


I think that Ronnie wanted the gas we handed out to be used on Iranians (and Kurds).

[Martin Blank]

Flag burning is nothing more than provocative symbolism. It does nothing to advance the class struggle or the movement for a revolution. I've never met someone who became a revolutionary because they saw a burning U.S. flag, or because they burned a U.S. flag. It's nothing more than an individualistic feel-good measure designed to let young radicals think they're "sticking it to The Man©" while actually doing ... NOTHING.

You want to really "stick it to The Man©"? If you're working class, go organize at your workplace and/or in your neighborhood, or talk with your co-workers and/or neighbors about current issues and what can be done to resolve them, or point them in the right direction so they can educate themselves and become revolutionaries. It might not be as glamorous or eye-catching as burning a colorful piece of cloth, but it does actually lead to progress.

In short, leave the symbols to the symbol-minded.

[MarxSchmarx]

Aren't modern (post wwii? post Spanish war? ) Americans just having others do their genocide for them, e.g. funding genocide against the Palestinians, the Kurds (when Saddam was Americas poodle), Guatemala...

While many ans is right, these genocides by puppet/client states aren't of the same magnitude as the holocaust or Rwanda, without the US AID its questionable whether these murderous regimes would have had so much power.

[ManyAntsDefeatSpiders]

Perhaps in America.

It has quite a distinct message when the flag is burned in Iraq or South Korea or ....

Would it be an 'individualistic feel-good measure' there?

[gla22]

Burning a flag can be interpreted two ways:

Hate against a government: Burn it, Imperialist pigs.
Hate against a country: Alot of the principles that the U.S flag stands for are good.

[redSHARP]

burn baby burn! if you want to protest then do it. personally i think flag burning does more damage then good, but i wont stop you.

[moltocrescenzo]

it wouldn't really prove much to just burn flags for its own sake. i suppose it could be powerful or effective in context. but even if it'd be a dumb idea, it doesn't matter. there's nothing illegal about it and even if there were, laws are illegitemate. ther is nothing morally wrong w/ it as it hurts no person.

[TC]

It's generally better to fly your own flag as opposed to burn someone elses.

Especially one associated in popular culture with Freedom, Liberty and Democracy. Burning it doesn't show that you don't think the US represents those things, wheras your cause does. To most It just says "I hate liberty Freedom democracy"

So it's a crap idea.

I disagree.

The American flag is to a large number of Americans an extremely emotionally loaded symbol, whether of pride, power, and gravitas or of oppression, fear and coercion. It is closer to a state symbol than a national symbol since the US has no national identity separate from the US State (it being, one of the few nation states where the state predates the national identity).

It is such a potent symbol that to burn it is to shock, demoralize and humiliate those who identify with the state and to uplift those who hate the state and make them feel courageous towards expressions of personal rebellion.

Its one of the most daring and emotionally loaded gestures of non-violent political defiance you can do in America, since it signals a radical break not just from the current government but from the US state as a whole.

[ChairmanArt]

All national flags and national anthems are disgusting. All of them represent the claim that human beings should exist to serve inanimate objects. They symbolize the idea that, in the event of any conflict between the population and an institution, sacrifice the population and save the institution.

"And so, my fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country." -- John F. Kennedy, 1961 inaugural speech

That is a most depraved and perverted remark.

I agree totally. As a US-born revolutionary communist, the American flag is the symbol of American oppression, exploitation, genocide, and atrocity both within and outside its borders, and the even more disgusting way that these crimes against humanity are perpetrated all in the guise of spreading liberty, popular sovereignty, and other values of which American imperialists have no real concept.

Burning that flag is telling the imperialists that you refuse loyalty to an empire that savagely murders and manipulates people, and you will never accept their distorted views of freedom. In short, it's a big screw you to the whole set-up, and I think anyone who feels the need to say this should be encouraged by revolutionaries to do so.

[TheDevil'sApprentice]

America does not have to be labelled as genocidalYes it does. Modern America has been heavily involved in genocide. I'll draw your attention to the Indonesian occupation of east timor.

www yale.edu/gsp/east timor/03-263 Ch 09.pdf
www medialens.org/alerts/08/080212_suharto_covering_up.php

Mass killings targeted by ethnicity, killing a similar percentage of the population as attrocities and starvation did under the khymer rouge. Done with massive US support, and with US weapons. That puts the US govt exactly on par with people hanged at nuremberg for their role in the holocaust. I can get many, many more examples should you so require.

Modern America is very different to Nazi Germany. A semblance of civil liberties exist for americas domestic population, and this is a very good thing. But in its foreign policy, the US government has no such restrictions, and its behavior is that of a totalitarian state of the worst kind. Indeed, many american client states were modeled on the third reich - the US saving nazi war criminals like klaus barbie at nuremberg, then paying them to work with their proxies - ensuring they got training from the best. For an free, short and easy intro to the nasty ways of US foreign policy, chomsky's 'what uncle sam really wants' can't be beat:

www cyberspacei.com/jesusi/authors/chomsky/sam/sam.htm

I think that its very arguable that the US government has done far more damage to the world than that of the third reich (admittedly over a longer timscale). Myself, I think that people are more justified in being offensive towards the US than the third reich, seeing as nazi attrocities were stopped over half a century ago, whilst US ones are happening right now.

(It wont let me post links, so they're just written with spaces)

[joe_the_red]

I think it is important to not that the U.S. company Bayer, you know them, they're known for making aspirin, sold something to the Nazis during World War 2. And, additionally, since this nation is actually run by big business, one could say that the government (well, those REALLY in charge, the ones with the money) were the ones that sold this to them. A little chemical known as Zyklon-B, which was the very gas used by the Nazis to kill the Jews. So, "indirectly", the U.S. also is responsible for their deaths. -Joe

[chegitz guevara]

Bayer is a German company.

[joe_the_red]

There is a U.S. division, as well. They had Zyklon-B well before the beginning of World War 2. And, a lot of American capitalists invested in Nazi industry and IG Farben (which Bayer is a part of) and other German companies, knowing full and well what they were doing. They made it all possible. -Joe

[joe_the_red]

If you want to learn about how corporate America aided the Nazi cause, you can read about it here:

http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/llt/51/pauwels.html

Cheers. -Joe

[Module]

I agree with TragicClown/Chairman Art ;
The American flag is a symbol of the state, more so than the nation. The nation has learnt to feel pride towards this state and this flag, but as a symbol of worship, not an encompassing national force.
The politics in America are completely different from that in Australia - politicians here can't afford to separate themselves from the nation, whereas in America they seem to thrive on making themselves some sort of quasi-religious figure.
Flag burning in that sense is not, I think, a symbol of defiance against the American people, and I doubt that many of them would think that if they saw it.
It is, instead, defiance against the state, and the state's perpetuated ideology.

[Voice_of_Reason]

The U.S flag doesn't mean anything anymore now its just some cloth hanging on a stick, not even worth the time to burn.

[gla22]

^^^^
It is still a powerful statement. Burn it and you will get a response.

[Voice_of_Reason]

I think it used to be a powerful statement more people are becoming less and less patriotic or at least patriotic by the governments term which is love everything we do. I think that a reaction would happen but only around the right crowd.

[Cheung Mo]

It's a waste of time and probably not so hot for the environment, but I don't see a burning American flag as being somehow bad or immoral.