Flags exist as symbols. That is the entire purpose of a flag. Therefore, removing a symbol is a symbolic removal of the thing it stands for. The Pride Flag symbolizes LGBTQIA+ rights. Therefore, it’s removal symbolizes removal of those rights.
Edit:
The context was @[email protected] making the case that the Pride Flag has no meaning, and is “just a flag”.
Political action doesn’t exist only when viewed. Political actions taken against the LGBTQIA+ community are still political actions taken against the LGBTQIA+ community, regardless of whether the game is on the market.
Edit:
The context was @[email protected] saying that the censorship was meaningless because it happened without the game being sold yet.
In scenario A, let us say a journalist writes a report about corruption, and it is censored before being released to the public. In scenario B, the report is released, then immediately censored. In both cases, it is censored.
It is not bad-faith argumentation. And it absolutely has something to do with our discussion. The point is that your logic doesn’t hold up when cast onto another work before and after release. Likewise, it does not hold up where you have used it.
Whether the game was or wasn’t released doesn’t change the fact that censorship took place. Censorship did take place—that is fact—and this censorship was political. Therefore the removal of the flag is political censorship, and has political significance.
Edit:
The context was @[email protected] saying that the journalist comparison was bad-faith argumentation because it was “unrelated”, despite it being a rebuttal of his claim that the censorship was meaningless because it occurred prior to release.
deleted by creator
Flags exist as symbols. That is the entire purpose of a flag. Therefore, removing a symbol is a symbolic removal of the thing it stands for. The Pride Flag symbolizes LGBTQIA+ rights. Therefore, it’s removal symbolizes removal of those rights.
Edit:
The context was @[email protected] making the case that the Pride Flag has no meaning, and is “just a flag”.
deleted by creator
Political action doesn’t exist only when viewed. Political actions taken against the LGBTQIA+ community are still political actions taken against the LGBTQIA+ community, regardless of whether the game is on the market.
Edit:
The context was @[email protected] saying that the censorship was meaningless because it happened without the game being sold yet.
deleted by creator
In scenario A, let us say a journalist writes a report about corruption, and it is censored before being released to the public. In scenario B, the report is released, then immediately censored. In both cases, it is censored.
It is like this.
deleted by creator
It is not bad-faith argumentation. And it absolutely has something to do with our discussion. The point is that your logic doesn’t hold up when cast onto another work before and after release. Likewise, it does not hold up where you have used it.
Whether the game was or wasn’t released doesn’t change the fact that censorship took place. Censorship did take place—that is fact—and this censorship was political. Therefore the removal of the flag is political censorship, and has political significance.
Edit:
The context was @[email protected] saying that the journalist comparison was bad-faith argumentation because it was “unrelated”, despite it being a rebuttal of his claim that the censorship was meaningless because it occurred prior to release.
deleted by creator