Warning: Undefined array key "birthday" in phar://.../vb/vb.phar/api/notice.php on line 1
Say what you will about Joe Biden -
Apolyton Civilization Site
The Altera Centauri collection has been brought up to date by Darsnan. It comprises every decent scenario he's been able to find anywhere on the web, going back over 20 years.
25 themes/skins/styles are now available to members. Check the select drop-down at the bottom-left of each page.
Call To Power 2 Cradle 3+ mod in progress: https://apolyton.net/forum/other-games/call-to-power-2/ctp2-creation/9437883-making-cradle-3-fully-compatible-with-the-apolyton-edition
What's with your recent linguistic precision kick? It's not necessarily a bad thing, but it's making you somewhat annoying to talk to...
In both of the recent cases I can think of there is an important point dependent on the linguistic precision.
In the "discrimination" case it affects the legal argument pro or counter gay marriage. Despite your continuous objections, the relevant precedent really IS Loving v. Va. Restricting marriage based on the relative group membership of contractees is discriminatory and based on the equal protection clause requires the state to actimvely prove its valid overriding interest in maintaining the discrimination.
In this case it speaks to the frankly unsavoury vicarious militarism of modern American civil society, a theme which was raised in the initial few posts of this thread. The average Canadian, for example, would not be caught dead referring to the PM (or Queen) in such an obsequious manner except as a joke. And if we're discussing linguistic fetishism, you're one to talk, given your response to MrFun
I don't think a love for the trappings of militarism is the reason for the common conflation of "President" and "Commander-in-Chief" in America. It seems natural that this would happen when the President and the Commander-in-Chief are always the same person.
And if we're discussing linguistic fetishism, you're one to talk, given your response to MrFun
I don't think it's fetishism to point out that he inferred a meaning from my sentence that clearly wasn't there.
KH FOR OWNER! ASHER FOR CEO!! GUYNEMER FOR OT MOD!!!
I don't think a love for the trappings of militarism is the reason for the common conflation of "President" and "Commander-in-Chief" in America.
Conflation is not the issue here. They are, as you point out, the same individual. The question is one of common parlance. Why is it that Americans are so in love with referring to the President as "the Commander in Chief"? Other countries' executives perform similar functions, yet far more emphasis is placed on this in the US. The great majority of the US federal government's expenditures and responsibilities are non-military in nature.
Secondly, and even more disturbingly, referring to the President as "your" commander in chief rather than simply "the" commander in chief implies very strikingly an acceptance of a personal command authority.
Why is it that Americans are so in love with referring to the President as "the Commander in Chief"?
Where's the evidence that Americans are "in love" with using the term?
Secondly, and even more disturbingly, referring to the President as "your" commander in chief rather than simply "the" commander in chief implies very strikingly an acceptance of a personal command authority.
I think you're imagining things. If I were to adopt the same paranoid view, I might wonder about the disturbing fealty Canadians show the Queen by placing her visage on every single one of their coins. That would be retarded, though.
KH FOR OWNER! ASHER FOR CEO!! GUYNEMER FOR OT MOD!!!
Why is it that Americans are so in love with referring to the President as "the Commander in Chief"?
Where's the evidence that Americans are "in love" with using the term?
Are you denying the VERY heavy usage of the term even when discussing non-military issues?
I think you're imagining things. If I were to adopt the same paranoid view, I might wonder about the disturbing fealty Canadians show the Queen by placing her visage on every single one of their coins.
That's pure momentum. Referring to Obama as your commander in chief is an ongoing choice.
Are you denying the VERY heavy usage of the term even when discussing non-military issues?
No. What I'm saying is that it doesn't reflect a love for the trappings of militarism. "President" and "Commander-in-Chief" are treated as interchangeable synonyms in America. I'd imagine most Americans don't even think of the military aspects of "Commander-in-Chief" when they use it to refer to the President...
That's pure momentum.
Whatever. We all know that it's really a reflection of Canada's intense nostalgia for the glory days of the British Empire.
KH FOR OWNER! ASHER FOR CEO!! GUYNEMER FOR OT MOD!!!
Tweet
Comment