![]() ![]() |
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
162.232.81.100
In Reply to: RE: First Man posted by Steve O on October 12, 2018 at 20:53:16
I will not submit to globalist social engineering.
Follow Ups:
... based on the huge many flags shown, start to finish. Yes, this guy counted.
Movie crowd social engineering.
..."revisionist history" or "revisionism" seems better suited. For the record, I detected nothing I'd describe as revisionist in the film although I wasn't really looking for it.
What did you detect as revisionist?
-Wendell
I found nothing I'd consider revisionist. Everything seemed about as I remembered from my innocent and impressionable youth. I'm sure there minor distortions of the pure truth in the interests of storytelling.
Recall up above BW stated he wouldn't be seeing the film due to something about flags. He implied the flag thing was a result of "social engineering. Although I don't agree with that assessment, I thought revisionism might be a better term if I did. That's all.
It's one of those currently fashionable nebulous buzz phrases that people throw around when they want to demonstrate political stances, based on attitudes. Usually used in some negative, cynical context.
Broadly, it can describe attempt to steer thinking or massage mindsets in populations.
I think revisionism is a subset of this catch-phrase concept.
And I think about everything is some degree revisionist in these times; even mathematics.
The movie sounds like a good one, regardless of real or imagined "engineering". People see what people see. Anything in these times that helps make Americans happy is a good thing.
...including the scene you were misled to believe wasn't there. Also recall Armstrong's carefully chosen words as he stepped onto the lunar surface for the first time. That wasn't "fake news" despite the premise of another truly great lunar landing film: "Capricorn One". Personally, I was upset that Armstrong was played by a CANADIAN.I suggest you go see it and just say you didn't. You'll be better for it.
Edits: 10/13/18
.
Wasn't he supposed to say a small step for "A man"?
Doesn't really make sense with the "A" missing, does it?
"Man" and "Mankind" are the same thing.
The words were carefully chosen and less carefully spoken? While "a man" is probably more grammatically consistent with the rest of the phrase, I think what we actually heard rolls off the tongue a lot better. And we all knew exactly what was meant regardless of the grammar.
As a child, hearing the first words spoken from the moon, i was confused at a sentence construction that was nonsensical. Once he got back , the man stated that he made a mistake in his excitement, and didn't recite his planned phrase correctly, leaving out a modifier critical to understanding.
one step for man has an interchangeable meaning with one step for mankind, no matter the circumstance.
A step for a man, is about one, singular man . As in, the history of man , or the history of mankind, both are understood as equal, the short version is more popular. The history of a man, very different.
I'm sure you know this, and I understood your point. I spelled it out for those who might not speak english well.
the singular modifier is critical to meaning. and a grammatical error that turned the first words spoken by a man, on behalf mankind, from the moon, into nonsense, went into history.
There was some discussion about it at the time.
There was a glitch in the transmission on "A giant leap for Mankind.
Nasa tried to say that garbled the word "A" in the first sentence.
But that made no sense.
He just said it wrong.
And yes, we know what he meant.
But it was a Story at the time.
Matter of fact I wasn't much interested in seeing it 'till realizing he's in it.
"Once this was all Black Plasma and Imagination" -Michael McClure
![]()
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: