# The progressive movement and the hypocrisy of our tavern culture



## hazeinmybong (Jun 4, 2018)

Wisconsin is said to have a "Tavern Culture" because we brew so much beer. There are tons of neighborhood bars in larger communities and every little town has a bar. Wisconsin is actually the birthplace of the progressive movement which is tantamount to any discussion of social inclusion in a more scientific government. The "Tavern League" is a special interest group in Wisconsin politics who has raised more than $2m for midterm elections here to produce laws that are favorable to bars and taverns. Wisconsin is at the state level dominated by conservative politicians representative of a largely conservative base. In Indiana, Mike Pence as governor signed into law the "Religious Freedom Act" which would allow businesses to refuse service to gay people. In Wisconsin, most bars have had signs hanging in them for years that say, "We Reserve the Right to Refuse Service to Anyone." This can be interpreted as to not be exclusive of any particular class of people, but it is an indication of exclusive behavior, and might encourage exclusive behavior in patrons and bartenders. Creating a law to force taverns to remove those signs would be more difficult because that would appear to be protected by the first amendment, it is not even really an unfair policy, but we are talking about the wall hangings in a place where Wisconsinites spend more time than they do in church. Without encouraging taverns to be inclusive, I think we can encourage them to not be exclusive and to be professional so that they can make money. Anyway, you are going to sit there for a couple hours and drink beer. Maybe your neighborhood bar has that sign. Bring it up. Some bars will probably just be like, "Yeah, you know what? I will take it down."

P.S. If I were Ted Cruz, I would sue Al Franken. I do admire Al Franken, and appreciate his service while in office. He did the right thing and I wish him the best.


----------



## Coywolf (Jun 4, 2018)

Huh, I'm not sure what your view of this situation is by this thread?

You are against the "right to refuse service to anyone" policies?

My stance on this issue is, that I believe in our society, businesses should have the right to refuse service to anyone. Its a private buisness, and i dont think it is the right of the federal government to force them to be inclusive.

But before all you SJWs start rating my post stupid, let me explain.

Anyone who's knows anything about capitalism, knows that a business's model must try to be as appealing as it can to as many people as possible to .maximize sucess..

Now, that isint necessarily true all the time, look at the gun industry, the churches, ect.

However, when it comes down to an establishment like a restaurant, a bar, or another public house type Buisness, if the owners are smart enough to see the growing trends of equality in this country, they will not enact such ridiculous biases against LGBTQ and POC. Its bad buisness. And it will eventually sink the businesses that do practice these biases.

If a bar is run by a right wing religious nutjob, I do believe it is her/his right to refuse service to anyone, even if that be LGBTQ or people of certain backgrounds. Its not right, but it IS that Buisness owners right, and the FED stepping in and taking that away would be a serious overreach in my opinion. It would open up the door to anti Buisness rights lawsuits from all sides.

How would the other side like it if they owned a buisness, and a obviously racist sexist douche came in, but you couldnt refuse him service because the federal government told you you couldnt?

Now, the most important part of this conversation.

YOU DO NOT HAVE TO BE A PATRON OF THESE BUISNESSES.

Fuck them! Don't give them your Buisness, boycott them! It's not there is only one establishment you can frequent (in most places, smaller towns are kinda fucked in that regard)

I do believe this to be the point here. Society is changing rapidly, and as Bob Dylan said "You better start swimmin' or you will sink like a stone..."

And this rings very true to businesses who support this type of BS. Don't go to them, and boycott them. Or mention it to the Owner, like the OP said.


----------



## roughdraft (Jun 4, 2018)

i think the 'right to refuse service' is genius. 

especially when say...the justice system fails and allows a pedo or rapist to live free....yeah a business can ban them and probably the decent people of <town-city-neighborhood> will respect that

as well say someone is wasted and/or acting crazy, fuckin up the vibe. the business owner can basically force them to leave WITHOUT police or violent intervention...in theory

an interesting topic 

i honestly thought by the title it'd be a critique of so called progressive people drinking themselves though


----------



## hazeinmybong (Jun 6, 2018)

That is why having a sign that is snarky and about inclusion is annoying. The discussion becomes about the moral good of free speech by praising exclusive behavior and I think feminists would agree that it is not funny. I hate signs.


----------



## Coywolf (Jun 6, 2018)

I cannot understand your last comment, like at all.

Are you saying you are for, or against the right to refuse service? I can't seem to understand your side of this issue.


----------



## hazeinmybong (Jun 13, 2018)

I don't like the sign and would not hang one in my bar. If we are all sitting in a bar being badasses because we are in a badass biker gang and someone comes in who is flamboyant, we don't need a sign to discriminate against him for being gay. Personally, I would be pissed if that guy went home with a guy I want to fuck. I don't spend money in bars just so people I want to fuck get to fuck other people. We exist in a capitalistic society.

Bars are just a clever way to get your friends to pay to drink with you.


----------



## hazeinmybong (Jun 13, 2018)

_Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMyZrTltZgg_


----------



## hazeinmybong (Jun 13, 2018)

_Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wd1bsxWeM6Q_


----------



## hazeinmybong (Jun 13, 2018)

Every neighborhood in La Crosse, WI is a nice neighborhood.


----------



## Coywolf (Jun 13, 2018)

hazeinmybong said:


> I don't like the sign and would not hang one in my bar. If we are all sitting in a bar being badasses because we are in a badass biker gang and someone comes in who is flamboyant, we don't need a sign to discriminate against him for being gay. Personally, I would be pissed if that guy went home with a guy I want to fuck. I don't spend money in bars just so people I want to fuck get to fuck other people. We exist in a capitalistic society.
> 
> Bars are just a clever way to get your friends to pay to drink with you.





hazeinmybong said:


> Every neighborhood in La Crosse, WI is a nice neighborhood.



....what in the actual fuck are you talking About?

How would a "we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone" sign assist bad ass bikers in discrimination?

That sign doesn't JUST create discrimination, it also helps Buisness owners clear our assholes or allow them to not serve obviously intoxicated patrons.

Also, are you a GAY bad ass biker in that gang? Because if the gay guy went home with a guy you wanted to fuck, that you were also discriminating against, that would probably make you a very confused individual....

Also, what the he'll is up with that second to last statement?

You just want to fuck everyone in the bar, and get pissed if anyone goes home with anyone else? That's some pretty misplaced thinking.

Also, that's not the only reason for a bar. I use them to get drunk.

But yes, it is a money making scheme. It's way cheaper to meet some people on the street, go to the corner store, and find an alley.


----------



## hazeinmybong (Jun 14, 2018)

_Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mIue359_ZN4_​


----------



## hazeinmybong (Jun 14, 2018)

_Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sir53cRkFHw_​


----------



## hazeinmybong (Jun 14, 2018)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zipf's_law
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_acquisition
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projective_identification


----------



## hazeinmybong (Jun 14, 2018)

_Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5e5UsPm5YQ_​


----------



## hazeinmybong (Jun 14, 2018)

Coywolf, do you identify as a progressive?

I am just trying to classify the sign as "exclusive" culturally. It does not qualify as "not-exclusive" to me.


----------



## hazeinmybong (Jun 14, 2018)

_Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2bDEreEbPE_​


----------



## hazeinmybong (Jun 14, 2018)

http://www.identitytheory.com/lauryn-hill-unplugged/

I love Lauryn Hill, but I am Mr. Intentional.


----------



## Coywolf (Jun 14, 2018)

See, that's my point. 

It can be exclusive culturally. That's the right of the buisness owner. But not every Buisness owner uses it in that way.

And no, I don't consider myself a progressive. I'm a leftist, sure, but there are a shit load of progressive-specific ideals that border on socialism which I do not agree with. 

I do have a conservative side. Just not the side that votes for Trump, hates LGBTQ, embraces capitalism, and perpetuates homelessness.

It's more of the personal responsibility, not forcing everyone to be equal in every way, gun rights, get the government out of my life sort of conservative side.


----------



## Coywolf (Jun 14, 2018)

Also, are you a SpamBot?

Because all of these random ass videos you are posting makes you look like one.


----------



## Deleted member 125 (Jun 14, 2018)

ok so um @hazeinmybong ive warned you before about posting spam. even if it is in a thread you created. if you continue to post random videos im going to give you another point which is going to mute yer account for 30 days. stop with the spam.


----------



## hazeinmybong (Jun 14, 2018)

Thats why this conversation is annoying. You are not a progressive defending my point with your conservative side. I am talking about a progressive "reserving the right" as hypocritical. You do not identify as a progressive. You don't perpetuate homelessness, and you don't appreciate socialism. Homeless people have to get jobs and be personally responsible for themselves? Homeless people will earn enough money with out social programs to be personally responsible for their own housing? Are you a Maoist? Should homeless people just join the military? Or are you a Christian and homeless people should just believe in magic and soak up the tithes of the blessed? Because I am a progressive who does express anti-war sentiment and I do not believe in god. I am fully capable of supporting myself, but I do have to prove that I am a moral agent without going to church, because Christians are only skeptical of atheism, if you are Christ you are a man of God and welcomed easily. I bet you are "into Kropotkin" or confederation haha. Only humans and ants have wars, but if your textile machine eats kids syndicalists will blow that shit up.


----------



## hazeinmybong (Jun 14, 2018)

_Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=liZm1im2erU_​


----------



## Coywolf (Jun 14, 2018)

Ok. I understood you there for a bit, but you went off on a tangent again.

First of all. I've been on and off homeless both by choice, and not by choice, for the past 10 years.

When I say personal responsible, i means personally responsible for their livlyhood and income. Whether that be holding a sign, getting a temp job when needed, or even stealing stuff (although theft is a borderline for me). It doesn't mean get a job.

I don't advocate, even in the slightest, for the government just giving out free money to everyone so they shoot dope. Especially of that money came from the exorbanent taxes I have to pay when I DO work. That's why I don't agree with the socialist system, unless there was a flat tax. 

I advocate for social services, they are necessary and and I use them often, but I am sure as shit aren't going to advocate the state paying everything for junkies and and people who have more Kids as a way to subsidize their income.

As a developed nation we should have the best welfare system on the planet. But not one that gets taken advantage of.

Also. This may some like I'm a stateist or some shit. But that isint the case.

I'm just a firefighter who is sick of getting a $5k paycheck after working my ass off for 14 days risking my life for 16hrs/day on a fireline to only see $2k of that due to taxes. And then see my tax money going to a $600 billion defense budget and some family who doesn't work but has 7 kids with another one on the way. This doesn't go for Food Stamps. I think everyone should have good stamps. And the government is cutting that program. 

I'm gonna get he'll for that, but ya, that's my conservative side.

As for the sign. You still aren't making a point. Progressives who use that sign, can use it as a way to evict asshole s from their b uisness. It's that simple. 

But it also allows for asshole s to evict progressives from their businesses. It is not something the state should decide. It is a PRIVATE buisness' decision.


----------



## Coywolf (Jun 14, 2018)

Did he seriously post more spam? Jeeze. Some people just don't get it.

I think he is a troll.


----------



## CaptainCassius (Jun 14, 2018)

Coywolf said:


> Did he seriously post more spam? Jeeze. Some people just don't get it.
> 
> I think he is a troll.


Leave it.. Guys either off his rocker, fckn with everyone, a bot, or potentially stupid or at least incapable of forming coherent arguments; and-

.. Ain't nobody got time for that


----------



## Deleted member 125 (Jun 14, 2018)

CaptainCassius said:


> Leave it.. Guys either off his rocker, fckn with everyone, a bot, or potentially stupid or at least incapable of forming coherent arguments; and-
> 
> .. Ain't nobody got time for that



which is exactly why hes been muted for 30 days.


----------



## Deleted member 20683 (Jun 15, 2018)

Coywolf said:


> And then see my tax money going to a $600 billion defense budget and some family who doesn't work but has 7 kids



Uh does this not strike you as kind of asymmetrical


----------



## Tadaa (Jun 15, 2018)

hazeinmybong said:


> I don't like the sign and would not hang one in my bar. If we are all sitting in a bar being badasses because we are in a badass biker gang and someone comes in who is flamboyant, we don't need a sign to discriminate against him for being gay. Personally, I would be pissed if that guy went home with a guy I want to fuck. I don't spend money in bars just so people I want to fuck get to fuck other people. We exist in a capitalistic society.


HAHAHAHA... best ever..


----------



## Coywolf (Jun 15, 2018)

oak moth said:


> Uh does this not strike you as kind of asymmetrical



I'm not entirely sure what you mean by that, but I'm saying that those two things are both things I don't want to pay for on either side of the political spectrum. Both conservative and progressive. Each side has spending that needs to be reappropriated. Like more money to food stamps, or better cheap/free medical care, or housing for all.


----------



## Coywolf (Jun 16, 2018)

How is that confusing?


----------



## creature (Jun 16, 2018)

i tuned in for the word "tavern".. goddamn..

does this really require an entire epistemological analysis...???


----------



## creature (Jun 16, 2018)

hazeinmybong said:


> Wisconsin is actually the birthplace of the progressive movemen


no no no... the progressive movement was birthed in France & the goddamned fucking USA in the mid 1700's...


----------



## creature (Jun 16, 2018)

Coywolf said:


> Anyone who's knows anything about capitalism, knows that a business's model must try to be as appealing as it can to as many people as possible to .maximize sucess..



Why is being a business more important than being a person?

i mean.. ok.. so a business has a right to hate pink eyed, 6 fingered humans..

but.. holy hands, Batman, the 6 finger folks have a lot of money!!

should we hate them but still take their money??

or get out the goddamned two holed bedsheets & do our damndest to keep them from *having* money, to begin with?


----------



## Deleted member 20683 (Jun 16, 2018)

Sorry I’m not trying to argue I just don’t get what you’re saying. You don’t want large families to have welfare, but you do want there to be more welfare in general..? (What struck me as asymmetrical in the first place was contrasting social spending alongside the military)


----------



## creature (Jun 16, 2018)

Coywolf said:


> How would the other side like it if they owned a buisness, and a obviously racist sexist douche came in, but you couldnt refuse him service because the federal government told you you couldnt?



unless they smell like hell from shit dripping out their pants, etc., my feelings wouldn't mean a goddamned thing..
they could have on a maga hat, a "blah blah blah" hate shirt, whatever..
so long as they don't raise their voice or threaten, they are equal.

i hate fucking loud bikes & i hate the assholes that ride them.
loud bikes are an infringement upon the natural state of quietude that exists without the presence of human technology.

i also hate loud trucks & most of the assholes who dig loud trucks for being loud, as well as assholes who play loud bass line music in fucking stop go traffic.

if the law didn't make us equal, there would surely be a great reduction in population..

but nonetheless..

the right to service from a business preempts the right to arbitrary hate.

"the right to refuse service to anyone", for instance, has *nothing* to do with profit, when it comes to denying it based upon race, etc..

unless being sued to Hell & possibly jailed is part of the equation..


----------



## creature (Jun 16, 2018)

anyways..

Sam Adams was a brewer, & a lot of drunk fuckers shoved balls into their muskets, when *that* was what 'progressive' demanded, because *they* were just shitty little colonists that the king saw fit to disenfranchise..

Capitalism, ideally is return upon investment of *labor* and *material resources* (not 'capital' as in money, because "capital", by fucking definition means "assets", NOT "money", and capitalism can exist in a money free, barter based & subsistence environment.

GOVERNMENT takes a portion of that profit, not because it has an inherent right to allow or not an individual to perform business activities as either a laborer or an asset owner, but because people basically hate each other, when they can't get something from someone & have to rely on 'mafia' type tactics..

which is where you get taverns..

excuse me..

it is almost noon & i need to hit up this morning's second bottle of sake'...

thwere you are you little vabaasrttard..

anyways..

if government weren't so fucked up, it would (theoretically) be more than a 'hit & miss' application of the premise of human equality..

but..

it does shit like making a 'business' (specifically a "corporation") which is an entirely secondary construct of human activity, the same status as a **legal individual**..

that is way, way *WAY* sciencefictiony fucked up..

so..

it has to fix it's fucked upness by being even more fucked up by clarifying what "refusal of service means" because it was too fucked up to understand that *anyone* who isn't shitting/pissing on the floor, or screaming or being otherwise directly hostile ***is just the same as any other person***

government is, ideally, supposed to be a sort of enforced conscious, democratically defined, based upon the fair execution of the notion that "one vote equals one bullet".

I don't mean to be too much of a shithead, but..

people are free..

what fucks people up, more than anything else, actually, is fucking *business*..

people trying to make money off of people without concern about what that money making does to them..

capitalism will justify the creations of addictions, the manipulations of psychology & identity, the destruction of the resources of others, etc. etc. etc.

how strange that despite "small" (500 or less employees) businesses being responsible for about 1/2 the economic output of the US, 50% or more of its profit is still concentrated into the holdings of about the wealthiest 1% of of US (not small) business owners.

it's fucking insane.. franchises, stockholders, brokerage firms... Christ Jesus Fuck..

please just kill us & let the animals live..


----------



## Coywolf (Jun 16, 2018)

oak moth said:


> Sorry I’m not trying to argue I just don’t get what you’re saying. You don’t want large families to have welfare, but you do want there to be more welfare in general..? (What struck me as asymmetrical in the first place was contrasting social spending alongside the military)



My point is that I've lived around people who have more kids they can't take care of on their own, because they know the government will subsidize them. Stop having kids if you don't have the means to take care of them. Also, I don't agree with the fact we can spend $800 billion on defense, but can't give housing and healthcare to our citizens.


----------



## Sluppet (Sep 20, 2018)

I found OP's sign lol


----------

