Post by Diversity Jack. / Redsky

Diversity Jack. • Feed

I don't see the virtue of burning your flag. Redesigning it, yes. So, a suggestion: those 13 states of the stripes are twice represented in the flag, so, instead, convert the stripes to a spectrum of (skin) colours that represents the diversity of the population. Evolve, move on, affirm diversity.

aug 26, 2025, 5:05 pm • 1 0

Replies

Figure out why we do it then rejoin the conversation.

aug 26, 2025, 5:52 pm • 2 0 • view

I'm not sure I understand the point of your comment but I get the condescending tone. What do you know of what I do and don't know?

aug 26, 2025, 6:52 pm • 1 0 • view

Jack - unfortunately trump threw diversity in the trash can. We’ll fish it out after we preserve democracy and the constitution. That’s the focus.

aug 26, 2025, 8:56 pm • 1 0 • view

And good luck to you.

aug 26, 2025, 8:59 pm • 1 0 • view

We’ll need more than luck.

aug 26, 2025, 9:05 pm • 3 0 • view

We'll need a lot more than luck.

aug 26, 2025, 11:18 pm • 0 0 • view

Chat got it right.

Text reads: Jack doesn't see the virtue in burning the US flag. Please explain it. Include the first amendment arguments. Make sure the point is not condescending, because he doesn't like that. I think he might be in the UK so using UK English might be a nice touch. reply: Got it — here’s a way you might explain it to Jack respectfully, in a UK-friendly register, without being condescending: ---line-- Jack, I think the reason some people see virtue in flag-burning — rather than redesigning — comes down to what it communicates in the moment. In the United States, burning the flag is legally recognised as a form of political speech. The First Amendment protects not only spoken and written words, but also symbolic acts that convey a political message. The Supreme Court has ruled more than once (notably Texas v. Johnson in 1989) that even if the act offends many, it’s still protected expression. For those who do it, burning the flag isn’t about a lack of imagination in design — it’s about protest at the nation itself or its government’s actions, not simply the aesthetics of its symbols. It’s a way of saying: “the values this flag claims to represent are being betrayed, so I reject it outright.” It’s deliberately stark, deliberately shocking. That’s the point — a visceral gesture that words, redesigns, or petitions might not achieve. Redesigns, like the idea you’ve suggested with skin-tone stripes, communicate aspiration and reform. Flag-burning communicates rupture — the belief that something is so badly wrong that only direct rejection can get the point across. Both approaches can have meaning, but they’re aimed at different registers of political expression: one constructive, one confrontational. So while you might not see virtue in it, for those who feel voiceless or unheard, it can be the most powerful way to use the freedoms that flag supposedly guarantees.

aug 26, 2025, 11:18 pm • 0 0 • view

Thanks but I was already well aware. Why assume otherwise? But burn whatever you like, so what. In the UK (I'm in Normandy) the Union Jack has been weaponised as a symbol of exclusion, and my flag is conceived as a symbol of inclusion. The suggestion for your flag is along the same lines.

aug 27, 2025, 8:40 am • 0 0 • view

Rather than wasting your time smugly educating the educated, spend more time helping to put your country straight so that it no longer fucks up the rest of the world, and, in particular, no longer interferes in the politics of Europe and the UK. Good to see we are both ChatGPT fans.

aug 27, 2025, 8:48 am • 0 0 • view