Actual racists only use these new symbols when the mainstream recoils in horror and labels the trolls incorrectly as racists instead of as trolls, or just ignoring them. I think many spreading the "it's ok to be white" slogan are trolls too. They enjoy seeing people freak out at a phrase that says nothing negative about anyone, but many people will read into it a hidden meaning. You can't discern intention in these cases, only assume based on your personal previous exposure. I seem to understand it as a response/analog to "black lives matter" which most people don't think secretly means white lives don't matter, and the posters think the disproportionate response is racial bias.

Your video, Hidden Meanings Behind Childish Gambino's 'This Is America', has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 15 Badge!

Hidden Meanings Behind Childish Gambino's 'This Is America' has been added as a related post - related requested by Sagemind.

*related=https://videosift.com/video/Hidden-Meanings-Behind-Childish-Gambinos-This-Is-America

*related=https://videosift.com/video/Critiquing-All-30-NHL-Logos-Secrets-and-Hidden-Meanings

Critiquing All 30 NHL Logos Secrets and Hidden Meanings has been added as a related post - related requested by RFlagg.

Also, isn't this just an allegory for a miscarriage? Better hidden meaning than Million Dollar Baby.

I did not. You may have inferred one, but I did not imply one.

On the contrary, in fact. I said that while we are talking about one, why are we not also talking about the other? Not sure what could have given you the impression that it was anything more than that.

You may choose to impart any hidden meaning you wish in order to furnish whatever paranoid perspective you have with ill-conceived evidence, but that's your choice and your fallacy. I won't try to convince you otherwise.

I know what you're trying to say, but for me closely examining a movie never gave me a net increase in enjoyment; finding plotholes and other things that just made no sense always outweighed any clever hidden meanings/insights.

hidden meaning or not, at least this was the era when Nicolas Cage movies were good. Outcast, anyone?

@Stormsinger

No, its just that you worded it as though you wanted to kill the man when you watch Rambo. You dont know the man himself so your words are just fluff without meaning, dont like his style ? okay. Do not appreciate his talent ? okay. First blood was a very decent movie full of character development and story telling with many hidden meanings as well as more abrupt tales of what a war vet goes through.

But you would not have gotten that out of "those" movies now would you. Enjoy the ignorance, fill your belly with it. I like how you put some thought into the reply, with a hint of angry bear.

"Shelby County Cemetery is unique in that it is one of the few government-owned cemeteries in the country."

Oops.

"Trying to make sense of it all" is another phrase that irks me. What doesn't make sense about this? People die all the time for all sorts of reasons. Some of them die when they are still babies. There's no hidden meaning here.

>> ^MaxWilder:

Only if they show some sign they are trying to learn. Otherwise they deserve to be mocked.


@MaxWilder But when has mocking ever been a successful tool for social change? Take Sarah Palin as just one example. She's mocked publicly on pretty much a daily basis yet you don't see her changing her opinions, do you? What you do see is people rallying to defend her from the "lib-tard smear campaign." And from there it just degenerates into name-calling and and rhetoric and there's no real dialogue about any issue. I don't think mocking help matters at all and in most cases just makes it worse.

@AnimalsForCrackers

I'd ask kindly that you respond what I write and not whatever "hidden meaning" you think my message has--there is none. I write as clearly as possible but if there is some ambiguity about what I wrote, how about you just ask me my opinion rather than make off-the-wall accusations and assumptions? Also, I'll ask once again (you'll remember from the last thread we had a discussion in), could you put an @ in front of my name when you respond to my posts so I get an email that tells me you're commenting about me and I can reply (thanks for the heads-up @bmacs27)?

MLK never insulted or condescended towards those he opposed. He advocated dialogue to promote change, not name-calling. He inspired people to find their commonalities, not focus on their differences. He did organize people to change the status quo and he did it without the need to be "militaristic" in any sense of the word.

I agree with you that secularists would be a great replacement name for atheists who believe the things you talked about (people should be free to practice religion, but it shouldn't invade politics or religion). But that's not what Harris and the rest have been talking about recently--as I demonstrated by doing you the courtesy a less-than-5-minute Google search and finding those three quotes/talks and pointing out what Harris said in this video clip.

Given the ease with which I found those it should be no problem for you to do me the same courtesy and send me links showing the three gentlemen expressing the views you claim to be their true position (there is in fact one video here on the Sift from Dawkins giving an interview in the UK--sorry, can't seem to find it in the search at the moment--from about 4 years ago where he puts out such a stance, but more recent comments seem to indicate that he's moved away from tolerance and more towards open hostility).

On a side note, what exactly is "religion" doing to "your country" (I'm guessing the US)? Are the Jains destroying the separation of church and state? How about those Quakers, can you imagine the damage their doing? And let's not even get started talking about the Buddhists. You accused me of not using words accurately, but I get the sense you're not using the word "religion" accurately. I think (feel free to clarify) that when you say religion what you really mean is fundamentalist Christians who believe the US in a "Christian nation" are ruining the USA. And that's fine, if you believe that, but let's not confuse a very vocal minority of religious believers with "religion."

Why don't I rail against religion? Because my position is that religion is not the problem (as I think I've told you in other threads). I've said repeatedly that religion is a tool that can be used for good or for evil and that the challenge for religions in the 21st century is going to be to try to change themselves so that they maximize the good and minimize the potential for evil. Are bad things done in the name of religion? Yeah, all the time. That doesn't de facto make religion bad, though. But I will absolutely criticize specific actions which I think are wrong, like I did on this other vid--I'm an equal opportunity critic.

You perceive religion as a threat, apparently. I don't. That's the difference between us. I'm happy to hear your views on why you think it is a threat. I'd be even happier if you listened to mine on why I don't think it is without getting either hostile or emotional.

Oh, great, another one of those "figure out the hidden meaning" songs.

*terrible

I only read the first few comments and it is already clear that many think that I want to talk about abortion. I really do not. There was no hidden meaning in my post. I just used abortion as an example because it is a unique situation and an interesting example for discussion about the value of human life. As in: Is it unethical to kill something that is biologically human but does not experience emotion. Or what about someone who does experience emotion but has absolutely no positive human experience? My question is more about what about life is worth preserving? Life or quality of life?