• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Your opinion on Coke's version of America The Beautiful? [W:1014]

Do You like this version of "America The Beautiful?"


  • Total voters
    104
I don't know what the big deal is. That said my favorite patriotic song is This Land is Your Land so maybe I don't have the emotional investment in America the Beautiful to get upset when someone sings it in any other language than American.

Take it back to North Korea, commie. :2razz:
 
I think everyone should learn English in this country as its by far the dominate language. However, we have no American culture. Set aside immigrants, and there are still vast cultural differences between different areas in this country. If anything, what defines American culture is diversity.

We do have a culture. That's exactly the point. It might be a somewhat ad hoc and non-uniform culture, but we do still have one.

Encouraging people to conform to it, rather than "do their own thing" is a desirable goal.

To an extent I can agree, but I also disagree. While it is understandably desirable to wish the hegemonic group to maintain dominance in all areas, including language, I feel that there is some short-sightedness going on too. For instance, if and/or when english does not become the dominant primary language, I would want the institutions, mythology, etc of the United States to be able to thrive without it. After all, although our language is dominantly english, we Americans pride ourselves on being based on a set number of ideas, rather than religion, ethnicity, and so forth. As the Coke ad does not diverge from the American ideological foundations (and instead seems to prop it up), I mostly say that this is another piece of good nationalism. I wouldn't wish this "Empire of Liberty" to be so totally reliant upon a language that it falls apart when it is no longer the most spoken. I'd rather it adopt a language as it needs to (although english is hardly going away, it's the most common language of international commerce-which is also a testament to our empire).

We weathered the flood of immigrants that arrived on our shores in the 19th and early 20th centuries without losing the fundamental essence of our society. Losing that essence (of which, the English language is a central aspect) now would seem to indicate to me that something has gone pretty seriously wrong.

Absent the culture responsible for its creation, can the United States even really be said to be the same nation anymore?

Frankly, besides even that point, the other problem with the ad's ideology is that it doesn't propose anything to replace our current cultural consensus. It simply shows everyone sticking with their original cultural trappings and languages.

As I said before, this strikes me as being problematic. That kind of thinking usually tends to lead not to national unity, but ethnical factionalism and partisanship.
 
Last edited:
I understand what they were going for, but the concept still made me vaguely uncomfortable.

If a nation's citizens need one thing in common in order to function effectively, it tends to be a language they can all speak and mutually understand. Tolerance for multiculturalism is all well and good, but it cannot be a society's primary objective in and of itself.

It simply doesn't lead anywhere productive.

Exactly why not?
The commercial was not making the suggestion that we abandon the core principles that this country promises to represent and serve. It's reminding us what those fundamental promises are. That people no matter what their faith or ethnicity are welcome here and will be provided equal opportunity and be judged by their deeds not their color or their faith or their language.

It is also not making the suggestion that we abandon english as our primary language, it has nothing to do with the language we speak or teach. It is about the diversity that makes us strong and makes America unique.
 
I was confused for a moment when I read this post, then I realized it was some straw man which explains why it has no connection whatsoever to my post.

No, I was agreeing with you. If you think its absurd, stop saying things like it.

Anyway, I didn't say anything you suggested I said.

Oh.

What does the first amendment have to do with anything if there are no laws being proposed that mandates English be spoken?

I think everyone in this country should be able to speak English, English should be taught in schools, English should be the official language of our government (that's not to say government products cannot be offered in other languages), but do need to learn how to speak and use English to become productive members of society. Multiculturalism is fantastic and you have have every freedom there is to belong to whatever culture you want to, but pragmatism makes it pretty clear that a society needs a basis of language in order to function.

Racist!


There it is.

I also think that everyone has the freedom under the 1st amendment to speak whatever they language they want,

Of course. No one has proposed otherwise.

to learn whatever language they want,

No one has proposed otherwise.

to speak a foreign tongue in their homes,

No one has proposed otherwise.

their communities if they wish,

No one has proposed otherwise.

to use it as their primary tongue if they wish.

No one has proposed otherwise.

Freedom of speech is not freedom of English speech.

No one has implied such.

The notion that you can't be an American unless you speak English, and ONLY English, is xenophobic, racist, and goes against the spirit of the Constitution.

And the notion that you must have a big toe shorter than the middle toe in order to be a pizza man is ridiculous and goes against the spirit of common sense.

Fortunately, no one has implied such and therefore we should be okay and don't really need to bring it up until such a thing is proposed.
 
Multiculturalism isn't achievable. Respecting others cultures who want to keep their traditions and values within our borders, while understanding the importance of mutually subscribing to common traditions and values, which are imperative for a nation such as our to be cohesive and strong for the good of our nation...is how it really works best.

Multiculturalism creates a lot of minority groups who ultimately vie for power...which in the process divide our common interests as a nation.

And to be clear...none of the above is in anyway in conflict with the idea of diversity. Diversity is how America came into its own. But those within the diversity recognized the need for shared common values, traditions and beliefs so that we would always come together for the general welfare of the whole.

Just my 2 cents.
 
Exactly why not?
The commercial was not making the suggestion that we abandon the core principles that this country promises to represent and serve. It's reminding us what those fundamental promises are. That people no matter what their faith or ethnicity are welcome here and will be provided equal opportunity and be judged by their deeds not their color or their faith or their language.

It is also not making the suggestion that we abandon english as our primary language, it has nothing to do with the language we speak or teach. It is about the diversity that makes us strong and makes America unique.

You're racist to imply someone is a different color because they speak a different language.
 
No, I was agreeing with you. If you think its absurd, stop saying things like it.



Oh.

What does the first amendment have to do with anything if there are no laws being proposed that mandates English be spoken?



Racist!



There it is.



Of course. No one has proposed otherwise.



No one has proposed otherwise.



No one has proposed otherwise.



No one has proposed otherwise.



No one has proposed otherwise.



No one has implied such.



And the notion that you must have a big toe shorter than the middle toe in order to be a pizza man is ridiculous and goes against the spirit of common sense.

Fortunately, no one has implied such and therefore we should be okay and don't really need to bring it up until such a thing is proposed.

I'm glad you aren't implying it, and I never said you were, now can you cut down on the sarcasm or is this going to get even dumber than it already is?
 
Exactly why not?

Sunnis, Kurds, and Shia.

Bosnian Muslims and Serbian Christians.

Tutsis and Hutus.

Making too much of a point of playing up ethnic distinctions within national populations simply doesn't lead to anything productive. People come to relate more to their specific group than they do the national body as a whole.

We already see shades of this in our current society with incidents like the Trayvon Martin shooting.

The last thing we need to do is encourage further differentiation. Whether by design or not, that is exactly what the coke ad in question does.
 
Last edited:
Every country has a culture. I'm tired of the "America has no culture" meme. Of course we do. We just don't notice it because it seems arbitrary to us.

One example of an aspect of America's culture is Antiquarianism. We like history, and we like to preserve history for ourselves and future generations. We have buildings all over the country that are preserved to remember the past. 9/11 is a good example as well, as many were concerned with how we were going to honor those lost at the site. Not everyone does this. Another example is our admiration of freedoms such as freedom of speech, which isn't shared in a lot of places. Of course, we also appreciate people sharing their cultures with us, but that doesn't mean we don't have our own.

Almost every country preserves its historical landmarks, there is nothing uniquely American about that. Certain parts of the country have a distinct culture, but unlike most countries we don't have a national culture. For example, culturally the upper midwest is so different than the deep south that they may as well be different countries. How much culture does Wyoming have in common with Massachusetts? The Pacific Northwest culturally has far more in common with Canada than it does with say, Arkansas or Tennessee.

That said, while we don't have a national culture, we do have something of a national character. For example, and this is subjective of course, but I think the most American in terms of character / persona president we have ever had is Teddy Roosevelt. While he didn't embody a national culture, he did embody what I think most of the world sees as the American character more than any other president we have had.

I think what defines America more than anything else is our diversity and our land / wilderness more than anything else.
 
Multiculturalism isn't achievable. Respecting others cultures who want to keep their traditions and values within our borders, while understanding the importance of mutually subscribing to common traditions and values, which are imperative for a nation such as our to be cohesive and strong for the good of our nation...is how it really works best.

Multiculturalism creates a lot of minority groups who ultimately vie for power...which in the process divide our common interests as a nation.

And to be clear...none of the above is in anyway in conflict with the idea of diversity. Diversity is how America came into its own. But those within the diversity recognized the need for shared common values, traditions and beliefs so that we would always come together for the general welfare of the whole.

Just my 2 cents.

I actually agree with this. :lol:
 
Sunnis, Kurds, and Shia.

Bosnian Muslims and Serbian Christians.

Tutsis and Hutus.

Making too much of a point of playing up ethnic distinctions within national populations simply doesn't lead to anything productive. People come to relate more to their specific group than they do the national body as a whole.

We already see shades of this in our society now with incidents like the Trayvon Martin shooting.

The last thing we need to do is encourage further differentiation. Whether by design or not, that is exactly what the coke ad in question does.

I don't think they are the ones that make the distinction or separate themselves. I believe that is imposed on them by people who think that unless you look and act like me you can't belong to my club. There is nothing wrong with acknowledging and retaining the parts of your individual culture that you are proud of, ours is not better then theirs.
 
Sunnis, Kurds, and Shia.

Bosnian Muslims and Serbian Christians.

Tutsis and Hutus.

Making too much of a point of playing up ethnic distinctions within national populations simply doesn't lead to anything productive. People come to relate more to their specific group than they do the national body as a whole.

We already see shades of this in our society now with incidents like the Trayvon Martin shooting.

The last thing we need to do is encourage further differentiation. Whether by design or not, that is exactly what the coke ad in question does.

You are describing tribalism with that. Moreover, getting upset over an ad like this that most people would not give a second thought to is an example of tribalism on your part. ;)

Social conservatives tend to have an authoritarian tendency to want others to conform to the culture and beliefs of their tribe.
 
Man, if some people are getting butthurt about THIS ad, I'd hate to think what the reactions would be to the banned anti-Redskins ad...
 
Take it back to North Korea, commie. :2razz:

I don't like it because it was written by a communist sympathizer, I like it because I think of the United States as a land more than anything else. I am sure others see it differently.
 
In terms of commercials it was one of the better ones, although that isn't saying much because most of them were about as terrible as the actual game, but I didn't see anything really wrong with the commercial.

Agreed. I can count the number of good commercials on one hand. This was one of them.
 
I thought I was paraphrasing the Constitution, apparently I saying something Orwellian. How disconnected are you?

You don't want an answer to that question
 
Man, if some people are getting butthurt about THIS ad, I'd hate to think what the reactions would be to the banned anti-Redskins ad...

Don't you know they fixed that?

WASHINGTON—Following an outpouring of criticism from across the country, the Washington Redskins announced Wednesday that they are officially changing the team’s name to the D.C. Redskins. “We’ve heard the concerns of many people who have been hurt or offended by the team’s previous name, and I’m happy to say we’ve now rectified the situation once and for all,” said franchise owner Dan Snyder, adding that “Washington Redskins” will be replaced with “D.C. Redskins” on all team logos, uniforms, and apparel. “It was a difficult decision—and one that, frankly, I’m a little embarrassed took me so long to make. So hopefully we can now put this issue to bed and start cheering on our D.C. Redskins.” In light of Snyder’s decision, Cleveland Indians owner Larry Dolan told reporters he will change the feather in Chief Wahoo’s headdress from red to a “more appropriate” shade of red.

700.jpg

Washington Redskins Change Their Name To The D.C. Redskins | The Onion - America's Finest News Source
 
I don't think they are the ones that make the distinction or separate themselves. I believe that is imposed on them by people who think that unless you look and act like me you can't belong to my club. There is nothing wrong with acknowledging and retaining the parts of your individual culture that you are proud of, ours is not better then theirs.

The immigrants of the 19th Century faced far more discrimination and prejudice than any today. They assimilated just fine, precisely because they didn't really have any other choice.

Today's culture, by way of contrast, encourages "multiculturalism" instead. As a consequence of that, many minority groups are opting not to assimilate, but rather remain distinct from the main body of our society.

As I have already stated, this is problematic for a variety of reasons; most of which center around the fact that this philosophy leads individuals to identify more with their ethnicity than with their nation, or culture of their nation, as a whole.

You are describing tribalism with that. Moreover, getting upset over an ad like this that most people would not give a second thought to is an example of tribalism on your part. ;)

Social conservatives tend to have an authoritarian tendency to want others to conform to the culture and beliefs of their tribe.

This is our tribe's land. Why on earth wouldn't we expect them to conform to our standards if they want to live here? :lol:

Surely, you agree that a single, more or less unified, tribe is better than a loose confederation of different tribes jealously vying against one another for power and privilege?
 
Last edited:
I don't like it because it was written by a communist sympathizer, I like it because I think of the United States as a land more than anything else. I am sure others see it differently.

Relax, I was just funnin'.
 
This is our tribe's land. Why on earth wouldn't we expect them to conform to our standards? :lol:

Surely, you agree that a single, more or less unified, tribe is better than a loose confederation of different tribes jealously vying against one another for power and privilege?

That is my point, we are and always have been a land of many tribes. I think its better to have a land of many tribes where most people could care less about tribalism myself. That is my thing, I don't care how many cultures we have. I just get worried when people start getting tribal about it.
 
The immigrants of the 19th Century faced far more discrimination and prejudice than any today. They assimilated just fine, precisely because they didn't really have any other choice.

Today's culture, by way of contrast, encourages "multiculturalism" instead. As a consequence of that, many minority groups are opting not to assimilate, but rather remain distinct from the main body of our society.

As I have already stated, this is problematic for a variety of reasons; most of which centering around the fact that it leads individuals to identify more with their ethnicity than the nation or culture of the nation as a whole.



This is our tribe's land. Why on earth wouldn't we expect them to conform to our standards if they want to live here? :lol:

Surely, you agree that a single, more or less unified, tribe is better than a loose confederation of different tribes jealously vying against one another for power and privilege?

Problem is that you'd have a hell of a time writing any law that would define how much of a person's culture they could practice without first throwing out the Constitution first. And hell what if it isn't even their culture but just a culture they want to practice? For example I've spent a lot of time studying Chinese, studying abroad in China, I've got a lot of experience and appreciation for that culture and language. However I'm still white American who grew up as a military brat and have no family connection to Chinese culture whatsoever but what I wanted to practice that culture, move myself to Chinatown, eat, work, and live like the other folks living there?

Why shouldn't I be allowed to?
 
You're not serious. Are you?

Yes, I am. I love that song, grew up loving it, and to hear it suddenly sung in unrecognizable gobble-d-gook just for the sake of an ideological agenda offended me to the core.

I love the "we are the world" songs; I love Mexican music, I love hearing it in their language, despite my own Spanish being sadly deficient; I grew up surrounded by Mexican culture, and the children of that culture were my playmates and my friends; I love the diversity of this country, and the various cultures.

I do not love having the songs of this country, the ones that have given me pleasant tingles since childhood, ravaged to where I can no longer even understand the words. I felt the same way when I heard the opening of a sports event preceded by the Star Spangled Banner sung in Spanish. It was incredibly rude, pathetically transparent, and yes, I ****ing hate it.
 
I'm glad you aren't implying it, and I never said you were, now can you cut down on the sarcasm or is this going to get even dumber than it already is?

No one is implying it.
 
Back
Top Bottom