logo 
spacer
  

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

If you have an opinion, you should share it! Register Now!

America's Debate hosts the best in news, government, and political debate. Register now to take part in the most civil and constructive debate on the Internet. Join the community, and get ready to be challenged!

Click here to start

> Sponsored Links

Register to remove these ads!
> Confederate Memorials, Should they be removed?
entspeak
post Oct 11 2017, 07:53 PM
Post #1


**********
Mammal

Sponsor
May 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 6,225
Member No.: 2,568
Joined: March-4-04

From: New York, NY
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: None



There have been two white supremacist rallies in Charlottesville recently and the past few months have been filled with discussions about the removal of memorials honoring Confederate military and government figures.

Should memorials erected to honor the acts and individuals who fought for the Confederacy be taken down (and, possibly, moved to places like museums?)

Why/Why not?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >  
Start new topic
Replies (40 - 59)
AuthorMusician
post Nov 11 2017, 04:09 PM
Post #41


**********
Glasses and journalism work for me.

Sponsor
November 2003

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 6,330
Member No.: 297
Joined: December-1-02

From: Blueberry Hill
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(Looms @ Nov 10 2017, 09:26 PM) *
Just like that, huh? Not a thought in either of your heads that may suggest that a definitive (read this or you're stupid) reading list on the Civil War by Ta-Nehisi Coates may be quite WOKE and not at all OBJECTIVE? Do guys actually enjoy being useful idiots?

I am sure that there are controversial things in just about any history book on the Civil War, and the more that's read about it, the more it becomes clear that the South has a lot of different takes on what happened and why than the North.

Got any Civil War history books you care to recommend? Amazon carries a ton of them, and the Internet has a bunch of reviews of them. The books are likely available in public libraries too, so this might actually be interesting rather than trollish.

You might also want to define what you mean by WOKE. Doesn't seem to make sense within the context you used it:

https://splinternews.com/how-woke-went-from...-int-1793853989

Might I suggest a less slangy term like subjective? It'd improve parallelism and wouldn't be so trendy in a kind of hipster whistling way.

Anyway, back to monuments. We should really keep the ones that have to do with all the generals and political leaders in the CSA who were hung by the neck until dead for treason against the USA. Put them in the courthouses too, if not already there shifty.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mrs. Pigpen
post Nov 13 2017, 12:37 PM
Post #42


Group Icon

**********
Carpe noctum

Sponsor
June 2003

Group: Moderators
Posts: 7,308
Member No.: 598
Joined: March-12-03

Gender: Female
Politics: Slightly Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE(entspeak @ Nov 11 2017, 02:30 AM) *
Oh. I’m sorry. Was that the only book on the list? I apologize. And, if you take issue with the facts in that particular book, what are those issues?


He didn't write any of the books on the list, he is the one who created the "read this so you'll be less stupid" list of recommended books.
Just briefly perusing this person's history, I'm hard pressed to think of a less objective person to come up with a recommended reading list on Confederate history (even the title is insulting to anyone who disagrees with his viewpoint). Considering historians are in disagreement about far more recent wars with far more information available, I do not agree there is only one "smart" way to think on this.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AuthorMusician
post Nov 13 2017, 10:24 PM
Post #43


**********
Glasses and journalism work for me.

Sponsor
November 2003

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 6,330
Member No.: 297
Joined: December-1-02

From: Blueberry Hill
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(Mrs. Pigpen @ Nov 13 2017, 08:37 AM) *
QUOTE(entspeak @ Nov 11 2017, 02:30 AM) *
Oh. I’m sorry. Was that the only book on the list? I apologize. And, if you take issue with the facts in that particular book, what are those issues?


He didn't write any of the books on the list, he is the one who created the "read this so you'll be less stupid" list of recommended books.
Just briefly perusing this person's history, I'm hard pressed to think of a less objective person to come up with a recommended reading list on Confederate history (even the title is insulting to anyone who disagrees with his viewpoint). Considering historians are in disagreement about far more recent wars with far more information available, I do not agree there is only one "smart" way to think on this.

Comparing more recent war information with what was left behind from the Civil War isn't valid. The more recent wars are shrouded in tippy-top secret docs that won't become available to historians for decades, if ever. But everything that has survived from the Civil War is now available to any historian doing research, and has been for quite a while.

A few other things that are different: We have a CIA now; active soldiers are not allowed to talk politics; correspondents (journalists) are more tightly controlled (don't repeat Vietnam); paper shredders were invented; historians rarely have access to docs from both sides of a more recent war.

While it's true that different takes on the Civil War are common, the only good ones (i.e., smart) have a lot of supporting evidence. This isn't true about the Southern propaganda that included the erection of Civil War monuments in support of Jim Crow discrimination during the early part of the 20th century.

But I do agree that a recommended reading list is simply a start down the road of getting, ahem, woke to what really happened and why. That is to say, smarter. So by all means, don't take anyone's word for it -- do your own reading. I highly recommend visiting as many battle fields as possible too.

Additionally, don't confuse novels with actual histories. And keep in mind that both sides had their own brands of propaganda. Good historians point this out in their works.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Looms
post Dec 16 2017, 04:19 AM
Post #44


******
Senior Contributor

Sponsor
January 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 429
Member No.: 1,416
Joined: October-11-03

From: Where you are, there you is
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: None



QUOTE(AuthorMusician @ Nov 11 2017, 11:09 AM) *
QUOTE(Looms @ Nov 10 2017, 09:26 PM) *
Just like that, huh? Not a thought in either of your heads that may suggest that a definitive (read this or you're stupid) reading list on the Civil War by Ta-Nehisi Coates may be quite WOKE and not at all OBJECTIVE? Do guys actually enjoy being useful idiots?

I am sure that there are controversial things in just about any history book on the Civil War, and the more that's read about it, the more it becomes clear that the South has a lot of different takes on what happened and why than the North.

Got any Civil War history books you care to recommend? Amazon carries a ton of them, and the Internet has a bunch of reviews of them. The books are likely available in public libraries too, so this might actually be interesting rather than trollish.

You might also want to define what you mean by WOKE. Doesn't seem to make sense within the context you used it:

https://splinternews.com/how-woke-went-from...-int-1793853989

Might I suggest a less slangy term like subjective? It'd improve parallelism and wouldn't be so trendy in a kind of hipster whistling way.

Anyway, back to monuments. We should really keep the ones that have to do with all the generals and political leaders in the CSA who were hung by the neck until dead for treason against the USA. Put them in the courthouses too, if not already there shifty.gif


No, said exactly what I meant to say. Woke is the correct term here. You're not actually someone who takes the term "woke" unironically, are you? Well, you do take your reading recommendations from Ta-Nehisi Coates (or anyone else that calls you stupid, I would imagine), so you may well be. What's next on the reading list? The history of the Holocaust, as suggested by David Irving? Perhaps a list of aircraft safety manuals, brought to you by Augusto Pinochet? Why do people with your political leanings love to be insulted so damn much? Seriously...he had you at "stupid"? Why? Why would you take any sort of recommendations from someone who starts by insulting your intelligence? For me, that would be the end of it. This is not a rhetorical question. I genuinely would like to know, from both you and entspeak.

As an aside...I started reading it without even noticing at who wrote this garbage. A few sentences in, I said to myself, "this sounds like it was written by Ta-Nehisi Coates." I look, and sure enough.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AuthorMusician
post Dec 16 2017, 03:48 PM
Post #45


**********
Glasses and journalism work for me.

Sponsor
November 2003

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 6,330
Member No.: 297
Joined: December-1-02

From: Blueberry Hill
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(Looms @ Dec 16 2017, 12:19 AM) *
No, said exactly what I meant to say. Woke is the correct term here. You're not actually someone who takes the term "woke" unironically, are you? Well, you do take your reading recommendations from Ta-Nehisi Coates (or anyone else that calls you stupid, I would imagine), so you may well be. What's next on the reading list? The history of the Holocaust, as suggested by David Irving? Perhaps a list of aircraft safety manuals, brought to you by Augusto Pinochet? Why do people with your political leanings love to be insulted so damn much? Seriously...he had you at "stupid"? Why? Why would you take any sort of recommendations from someone who starts by insulting your intelligence? For me, that would be the end of it. This is not a rhetorical question. I genuinely would like to know, from both you and entspeak.

As an aside...I started reading it without even noticing at who wrote this garbage. A few sentences in, I said to myself, "this sounds like it was written by Ta-Nehisi Coates." I look, and sure enough.

Ah, I see. You were being ironic. Sorry about not catching that intention, guess I'm not enough of a hipster.

I had done my reading on the Civil War while working in N. Virginia, close to DC and within a day trip of most battle fields. Thought I was pretty clear on that. It was from 1988 to 1993, so I'll let you do the math on whether the guy you're obsessing about had any influence on that. (This is not irony; it's straight up sarcasm.)

Meanwhile, I stand by my desire to leave all the CSA memorials up for the leaders who were hung by the neck until dead due to having been traitors to the USA. That is also sarcasm.

Here's irony: President Lincoln was shot to death by a guy who should have been hung for being a traitor. It's ironic because Lincoln could have hung him, along with the others, but decided not to. That led to Lincoln's assassination.

Then the South got reconstruction, which might have gone a lot better without the assassination of Lincoln. Ironic? Maybe. But this is truly ironic: The South went Republican during the civil rights movement of the 1960s. Huh, the party of Lincoln. Then the SCOTUS let the South off the hook regarding Jim Crow tendencies, and those states quickly made it harder for minorities to vote. Huh. Then we got Trump, a man who seems to be liked by racists and traitors and Putin. Well, maybe not so much Putin after Trump failed to lift sanctions.

Irony abounds in the present political climate, including states like Michigan and Wisconsin getting all medieval with their citizens. So maybe give senior citizens such as myself a little slack for not picking up on your attempts at being clever. Of course it would help if you understood the difference between irony and sarcasm, but I give a lot of slack to the younger generations. Youth can't help being ignorant, as demonstrated by my generation's attempts at building their own societies, aka, communes. Getting woke takes a lot of time, apparently.




Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
entspeak
post Dec 27 2017, 04:12 PM
Post #46


**********
Mammal

Sponsor
May 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 6,225
Member No.: 2,568
Joined: March-4-04

From: New York, NY
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: None



If theyre is a problem with the books on the list, then explain what those are. Dismissing the books and any information contained in them because of what you feel about the person who created the list is called poisoning the well... it is a fallacy and a distraction. This debate is not about how you feel about Coates.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Eeyore
post Jan 2 2018, 07:00 AM
Post #47


Group Icon

********
Thaaaaanks for noticin' me

Sponsor
February 2003

Group: Moderators
Posts: 2,483
Member No.: 365
Joined: December-28-02

From: Nashville
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



Private Statue of Nathan Bedford Forrest vandalizedForrest Vandalization interview

I had heard that the owner of this statue called the people who did this cowards running around with sheets over their heads In watching this interview I find absolutely no sense of irony in his voice.

I have had a number of difficult conversations about this statue that is on private property facing highway 65 for years. With my oldest daughter who is partly of African descent, with the host-son from China, with my youngest daughter. As a student and teacher of history in Alabama and Tennessee the issue of the symbols of the Confederate era has often been a discussion and at times a heated debate.

I honestly cannot imagine living near monument avenue as a parent and teacher and not feeling strongly enough to act to have it altered or removed. Arthur Ashe may be an anachronistic in joining the collection, but if they remain I would suggest that statues be added to pay homage to Nat Turner (a Virginian) and David Walker.

In the series of discussions I have had with people about monuments this year (I nave been surprised how they have tended to be thoughtful expressions of perspective and active listening by participants) my research led me to three main types of proposals floating around.

1. Leave them be
2. Take them down (a perhaps place them in a museum)
3. When statues are left other monuments to the period should be added to add perspective to the monument.

I also came to an understanding about monuments. It is that all statues and monuments say things about three different time periods. 1. The time period being commemorated by the monument. 2. The time period of the artist/parton/community that created and authorized it and 3. The people of the present time that maintain and retain the monument

From these understandings about this topic I came to two conclusions.

1. It is more than valid that a discussion about retaining monuments be held. And just as one generation made a creation in public space each subsequent generation has the right and obligation to discuss the use of the public space for a monument.

2. I am in favor in many cases of keeping statues that depict confederate monuments in place as long as a broader and modern perspective is added to the monument in question. This can be a depiction of a laboring slave, a black voter during reconstruction, a leader of a slave uprising or something of that ilk. In addition I think plaques explaining the debate and the reasons for more broadly contextualizing the monuments (including adding literal contextualization) would be the best way to approach this issue.

I pondered this topic deeply when I walked around Robert E. Lees plantation this past fall for the first time. Mostly confiscated by the federal government and turned into Arlington National Cemetary it is the embodiment of a field of monuments. I think we have done a beautiful and solemn and unifying thing there. I think each generation can add its voice in regards to the way Robert E. Lee is depicted on that campus.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
entspeak
post Jan 26 2018, 01:04 PM
Post #48


**********
Mammal

Sponsor
May 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 6,225
Member No.: 2,568
Joined: March-4-04

From: New York, NY
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: None



I am not in favor of removing the protected status of many historical Civil War sites - locations of battles, people’s homes, etc... Those serve historic value and don’t, necessarily, commemorate the actions of the individual so much as they provide historical information about who that person was or what occurred at that place.

Statues and Monuments differ in that they aim to commemorate someone or something in a particular way. Arlington is a good example of this. Arlington House is a commemoration of Lee’s efforts after the war - his attempts to unify a divided country. Many of the confederate monuments are intended to maintain the divide by celebrating the actions of white supremacists during the war - to cast those actions as honorable and heroic. That is a big difference. They don’t serve a historic function other than attempting to reframe and rewrite it.

This post has been edited by entspeak: Jan 26 2018, 01:06 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AuthorMusician
post Jan 26 2018, 05:33 PM
Post #49


**********
Glasses and journalism work for me.

Sponsor
November 2003

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 6,330
Member No.: 297
Joined: December-1-02

From: Blueberry Hill
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(entspeak @ Jan 26 2018, 09:04 AM) *
I am not in favor of removing the protected status of many historical Civil War sites - locations of battles, people’s homes, etc... Those serve historic value and don’t, necessarily, commemorate the actions of the individual so much as they provide historical information about who that person was or what occurred at that place.

Statues and Monuments differ in that they aim to commemorate someone or something in a particular way. Arlington is a good example of this. Arlington House is a commemoration of Lee’s efforts after the war - his attempts to unify a divided country. Many of the confederate monuments are intended to maintain the divide by celebrating the actions of white supremacists during the war - to cast those actions as honorable and heroic. That is a big difference. They don’t serve a historic function other than attempting to reframe and rewrite it.

I'm not all that keen on war memorials in general due to the truly bad art they represent. The exception to this that really stands out is the Vietnam memorial on the DC Mall, aka The Wall. Guys with swords held high on horses are what annoy me. You never see the other side of this, which isn't heroic at all but entirely human. Such a memorial would look like The Scream instead. The Wall allows for that take by not making any obvious statement -- it's art that truly has to be experienced, and its impact is usually pretty powerful. I've not met anyone who wasn't deeply moved during the walk down and back up.

A close second is the Vietnam nurses' memorial. Coming in third is the Iwo Jima (The US Marine Corps War Memorial) statue, but I'm rating it lower due to how the image got into the national consciousness. There's a lot of propaganda involved, and that detracts from its effectiveness as art.

I can't think of a single Civil War memorial that works as well as the battle fields for impressing the mind and spirit with the truth of war.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Gray Seal
post Jan 26 2018, 09:13 PM
Post #50


********
Millennium Mark

Group: Members
Posts: 2,397
Member No.: 335
Joined: December-12-02

From: Edwardsville, IL
Gender: Male
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: None



AuthorMusician, I like your point about memorials not being the same. Historical sites have a value which goes beyond statues which immortalize a person. When at a historical site, you can imagine what it must have been like at the spot you can occupy now. Statues are someone's story. Statues are not concrete, even if they may be made of it.

Sites such as the Vietnam memorial are different. There is a story. It is the story people bring with them when they go there.

So a summary:

historical locations........Great
historical memorials......Good
historical statues..........Questionable
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AuthorMusician
post Jan 27 2018, 04:52 AM
Post #51


**********
Glasses and journalism work for me.

Sponsor
November 2003

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 6,330
Member No.: 297
Joined: December-1-02

From: Blueberry Hill
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(Gray Seal @ Jan 26 2018, 05:13 PM) *
Sites such as the Vietnam memorial are different. There is a story. It is the story people bring with them when they go there.

Agreed -- I don't recall whether it was planned or not during the conception stage, but a huge part of the experience involves people rubbing names with paper and pencil, the things left behind, and the other visitors' presence. I found it impossible to talk with anyone while at The Wall and for maybe an hour afterward.

Now that's real art.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nighttimer
post Feb 12 2018, 02:36 AM
Post #52


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Sponsor
February 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,660
Member No.: 504
Joined: February-16-03

Gender: Undisclosed
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: Undisclosed



QUOTE(entspeak @ Oct 11 2017, 03:53 PM) *
There have been two white supremacist rallies in Charlottesville recently and the past few months have been filled with discussions about the removal of memorials honoring Confederate military and government figures.

Should memorials erected to honor the acts and individuals who fought for the Confederacy be taken down (and, possibly, moved to places like museums?)

Why/Why not?


Every memorial erected to honor the acts and individuals who fought for the Confederacy should be taken down. Not to be moved to a museum, but to removed to a landfill along with all the other useless, past its prime junk which serves no purpose. Well, it does serve one purpose. It permits a bigoted few and an indifferent many to pay homage to White men who gave up their lives for the divine right to keep Black men in chains.

Of course, I understand how it is when a bigoted few and an indifferent many get all up in their feelings. "You're defiling history! You're making ALL the soldiers who fought and died in the Civil War look like racists when most of them didn't even own slaves! It's unfair!"

Here are all the damns I give about that.

Confederate statues and memorials are a problem. Here's a solution to that problem. Keep them right where they are. The pigeons can keep using Nat Forrest and Bobby Lee as toilets, but put right next to it a statue of a Black man being whipped or a Black woman being raped to provide the necessary historical balance. Honor your precious "heroes" of a treasonous war all you like. Just don't try to sugarcoat what they were fighting for.


QUOTE(Mrs. Pigpen @ Oct 15 2017, 04:10 PM) *
QUOTE(entspeak @ Oct 14 2017, 09:05 PM) *
At what point did removing a statue because it was erected to celebrate the white supremacist acts of the Confederacy, or as an attempt to intimidate, or to put the middle finger up to those who would further the progress of racial equality become an "arbitrary political reason?" How is that "arbitrary?" That seems to be the opposite of arbitrary.


It wouldn't be arbitrary in 1950, but it seems arbitrary in 2017 to me.
How many people today still view things as the people who set them in place originally did?
Very very few I'm sure.
Like most things over time, they've become a part of the culture of the area (in this case "the South").
It doesn't surprise me their removal feels like an assault on their culture to many people.
I'd prefer not to get into a Civil war debate, but I think it's reasonable to believe every situation was unique to the individual.
Everyone had his own reasons to fight.
There were honorable and dishonorable people on both sides. Just like any other war.
People tended to be loyal to their home.
Example: Nazi Germany was a toxic ideology in my estimation, but I still think Rommel was an honorable man.
I think the same of Robert E Lee.


If removing a statue is an "assault" on the culture of many people what is commemorating the cannon fodder who fought to preserve a racist institution but an assault on those whose ancestors were held in human bondage. To celebrate the Confederacy is to celebrate slavery and slavery is an abomination.

Honorable men lose their honor fighting for dishonorable causes. I think that of Erwin Rommel and Robert E. Lee. They were soldiers who made war on the behalf of a evil cause. You can finesse it any way you want, but you can ho more separate the wretched justifications behind the Confederacy than you can from the Nazis. The big difference is in Germany, you don't find pigeon stained statues in a public park of Goering, Goebbels, or Himmler. Maybe the Germans prefer to bury their ignoble past instead of sentimentally celebrate the depraved practice of trading in human flesh.

QUOTE
One day in January, a few years before the Civil War, Robert E. Lee wrote to The New York Times, seeking a correction.

The man who would become the top Confederate general was trying to set the record straight about the slaves on his wife's estate in Virginia, and about the last wishes of a dying slave owner.

He wrote that the people enslaved on his family's property, in what was then known as Alexandria County, were not "being sold South," as had been reported. And he implied that he would free them within five years.

The letter is one of many written by Lee that sheds slivers of light on his thoughts about slavery. Historians have clashed and are clashing still over the strength of his support for the system of forced labor that kept millions of people in bondage for generations.

"He was not a pro-slavery ideologue," Eric Foner, a Civil War historian, author and professor of history at Columbia University, said of Lee. "But I think equally important is that, unlike some white southerners, he never spoke out against slavery."

Of all the letters by Lee that have been collected by archivists and historians over the years, one of the most famous was written to his wife in 1856. "In this enlightened age, there are few I believe, but what will acknowledge, that slavery as an institution, is a moral & political evil in any Country," he wrote.

But he added that slavery was "a greater evil to the white man than to the black race" in the United States, and that the "painful discipline they are undergoing, is necessary for their instruction."


There's your "honorable man." Lee had reservations about slavery, but not enough to prevent him from owning them. Not enough for him to fight to preserve slavery. Not enough for him to consider it was Black slaves who suffered more than White slaveowners. Not enough to make him doubt the "painful discipline" slaves underwent was necessary.

There's nothing honorable about that. There's nothing worthwhile that needs to remain from that era of evil. There's nothing about those damned statutes of merit to spare them from being sledgehammered into a million pieces and forgotten as the anachronisms they are.

History is written by the winners. The South lost. Screw their "culture" of subjugation, White supremacy and dehumanizing an entire race. It's the past and it's dead and it's gone and it's over.

White people tell Black people to "get over" slavery. Black people should tell White people we will just as soon as you do.

QUOTE(Mrs. Pigpen)
That said (as I mentioned before) that doesn't necessarily mean it has to stand forever. But the removal process should take time (years), include the opinion of historical experts, and not come across as a reaction to the wishes of a politically motivated mob that seems to only have an interest in creating civil disharmony and unrest.
Again, there is no urgency here.


No, what you mean there is no urgency here for you. For those of us who don't see any reason to wait for years it is very urgent. There is no reason to wait for the opinion of historical experts, because in the judgment rendered by historians, the South lost the Civil War and they don't deserve participation trophies for showing up. Whenever someone tells me, "It's too soon and this takes time" it tends to make me believe there never will be a right time.

The hell with that.

"Civil disharmony and unrest?" That's probably what Bull Connor, Lester Maddox and the White Citizens Council said what the Freedom Riders were creating. Nothing bad ever changes in this country without a little disharmony and unrest. The status quo only works for those who benefit from keeping the peace. Everybody else gets screwed. Screwed hard, deep and dirty and nobody got gets screwed harder, deeper and dirtier than people of color in this country.

Nobody.

Politically motivated people are not the mob. The mob is the slack-jawed suckers who think its their peace being disturbed and believe they will be the losers when others are winning. Politically motivated people are the only people who change the world. Conformists and cowards change nothing.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
net2007
post Feb 12 2018, 07:12 PM
Post #53


********
Millennium Mark

Group: Members
Posts: 1,221
Member No.: 7,629
Joined: April-27-07

From: North Carolina
Gender: Male
Politics: Slightly Conservative
Party affiliation: Republican



nighttimer

Regardless of my following criticisms, welcome back.

I don't have a strong opinion on whether or not confederate memorials should be removed, that's not because I don't think it's an important issue, it's because I know those with either position on this feel that position is important to them. Ideally, I think it should be handled on a local level where they can decide what they want. If I was a Mayor, Governor, or the President, (whoever could make this happen), I'd start talking about each town or city which has a Confederate Memorial having a vote on them and let majority rule. Perhaps that would ease tensions some if everybody was given a chance to be heard. When it comes down to it, the opinions of all races matter.

I remember some of our debates very well, I'd say you're a skilled researcher but I don't think you'll ever be satisfied and remain resentful if the vast majority of that research is focused on cases where you feel white people have done something unfair to black people. I think it's important to understand history including understanding things which could harm us and that these type of topics should be mentioned and discussed because we can learn from our mistakes. However, you'll also learn from the contributions other races have made. Not to minimize the message behind your avatar but America is defined by more than things like slavery, suppression, and racism. That's a part of America's history, some of which lingers today, but although those things are a part of our country, they don't define it.

I'm not suggesting not to discuss these topics, not that you'd listen to me anyway and I wouldn't want you to. With that said it'd be interesting to see a topic from you on something unrelated to race. I debated with you for a while at AD and I have no idea what you believe on other topics. I remember you read a book on why Republicans are wrong on every issue (paraphrasing, it's been a while), it'd be interesting if you expanded some on that with a new thread. They're certainly flawed, enough to have me vote independent during the last presidential election, but I bet I could give you a run for your money challenging the premise of that book.

This post has been edited by net2007: Feb 12 2018, 07:14 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nighttimer
post Feb 13 2018, 02:27 AM
Post #54


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Sponsor
February 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,660
Member No.: 504
Joined: February-16-03

Gender: Undisclosed
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: Undisclosed



QUOTE(net2007 @ Feb 12 2018, 03:12 PM) *
nighttimer

Regardless of my following criticisms, welcome back.


Thanks, but this is only a visit, not a stay.

QUOTE(net2007)
I don't have a strong opinion on whether or not confederate memorials should be removed, that's not because I don't think it's an important issue, it's because I know those with either position on this feel that position is important to them. Ideally, I think it should be handled on a local level where they can decide what they want. If I was a Mayor, Governor, or the President, (whoever could make this happen), I'd start talking about each town or city which has a Confederate Memorial having a vote on them and let majority rule. Perhaps that would ease tensions some if everybody was given a chance to be heard. When it comes down to it, the opinions of all races matter.


But not all opinions of all race matter equally. If they did, there would be no Confederate statues anywhere but private property, which is where they belong if they aren't all trashed entirely. The statues weren't installed by having a vote. They were installed by majority rule. White majority rule. Everybody wasn't heard then and everybody won't be heard now.

I'm not opposed to raising tensions because this crap has gone on too long anyway. It's absurd to suggest as Mrs. Pigpen has that we need to wait "years" to decide if the statues should stay or go. That's garbage. The Confederacy was an assemblage of treasonous traitors to the United States and every aspect of it should be wiped any like a puppy's piddle on a white carpet.

Besides, if it's not important to you, why do you have an opinion either way?

QUOTE(net2007)
I remember some of our debates very well, I'd say you're a skilled researcher but I don't think you'll ever be satisfied and remain resentful if the vast majority of that research is focused on cases where you feel white people have done something unfair to black people. I think it's important to understand history including understanding things which could harm us and that these type of topics should be mentioned and discussed because we can learn from our mistakes. However, you'll also learn from the contributions other races have made. Not to minimize the message behind your avatar but America is defined by more than things like slavery, suppression, and racism. That's a part of America's history, some of which lingers today, but although those things are a part of our country, they don't define it.


That's a pretty sentiment. But its also pretty naive and naivete is neither useful or helpful. America is defined by its best and its worst and among its worst are slavery, suppression and racism. I'd add White Supremacy to that as well including the White Supremacist stinking up the Oval Office even now.

Satisfied? Why would I ever be satisfied? You see MLK's dream come true? I haven't. You see the end of crappy schools, prisons filled to bursting, cops killing and getting away with shooting unarmed Black people, voter suppression and disenfranchisement schemes planned and perpetrated by Republican politicians, or drugs and guns flooding into urban neighborhoods as Black bodies flood out?

I don't think I'll ever be satisfied because I don't America will ever stop being a bastion of bigotry, racism and White supremacy. You see that as a part of America's history that has receded with the passage of time. I see it as a part of America's present and America's future. That's not me being "resentful." That's me connecting the dots and seeing a much bigger and bleaker picture of this country than you do. It's not that I'm a skilled researcher that I know this. It's that I don't need 28 days in February to know Black history and I've never believed in American exceptionalism and I've never believed God spread all his blessings on this little piece of the Earth and blew off everywhere else.

Satisfied? What are you smoking? smoke.gif

QUOTE(net2007)
I'm not suggesting not to discuss these topics, not that you'd listen to me anyway and I wouldn't want you to. With that said it'd be interesting to see a topic from you on something unrelated to race. I debated with you for a while at AD and I have no idea what you believe on other topics. I remember you read a book on why Republicans are wrong on every issue (paraphrasing, it's been a while), it'd be interesting if you expanded some on that with a new thread. They're certainly flawed, enough to have me vote independent during the last presidential election, but I bet I could give you a run for your money challenging the premise of that book.


Sorry, but I'm kind of focused on topics related to race. Because race matters. Even when you aren't really interested or others say its not a big deal. Mostly it's not a big deal to you until someone says or does something related to race that can't be easily ignored and then you care a little bit more. But usually only because you're annoyed at the reaction, not the provocation.

That much I recall quite clearly about entering into debates with you. I'm not nostalgic to repeat the experience.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mrs. Pigpen
post Feb 13 2018, 01:12 PM
Post #55


Group Icon

**********
Carpe noctum

Sponsor
June 2003

Group: Moderators
Posts: 7,308
Member No.: 598
Joined: March-12-03

Gender: Female
Politics: Slightly Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE(nighttimer @ Feb 11 2018, 10:36 PM) *
QUOTE(Mrs. Pigpen)
That said (as I mentioned before) that doesn't necessarily mean it has to stand forever. But the removal process should take time (years), include the opinion of historical experts, and not come across as a reaction to the wishes of a politically motivated mob that seems to only have an interest in creating civil disharmony and unrest.
Again, there is no urgency here.


No, what you mean there is no urgency here for you. For those of us who don't see any reason to wait for years it is very urgent.


I linked to a PBS/NPR poll in this thread indicating a higher percentage of black people want the statues to remain and not be removed.

This post has been edited by Mrs. Pigpen: Feb 13 2018, 01:17 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
net2007
post Feb 13 2018, 05:33 PM
Post #56


********
Millennium Mark

Group: Members
Posts: 1,221
Member No.: 7,629
Joined: April-27-07

From: North Carolina
Gender: Male
Politics: Slightly Conservative
Party affiliation: Republican



QUOTE(nighttimer @ Feb 12 2018, 09:27 PM) *
QUOTE(net2007 @ Feb 12 2018, 03:12 PM) *
nighttimer

Regardless of my following criticisms, welcome back.


Thanks, but this is only a visit, not a stay.

QUOTE(net2007)
I don't have a strong opinion on whether or not confederate memorials should be removed, that's not because I don't think it's an important issue, it's because I know those with either position on this feel that position is important to them. Ideally, I think it should be handled on a local level where they can decide what they want. If I was a Mayor, Governor, or the President, (whoever could make this happen), I'd start talking about each town or city which has a Confederate Memorial having a vote on them and let majority rule. Perhaps that would ease tensions some if everybody was given a chance to be heard. When it comes down to it, the opinions of all races matter.


But not all opinions of all race matter equally. If they did, there would be no Confederate statues anywhere but private property, which is where they belong if they aren't all trashed entirely. The statues weren't installed by having a vote. They were installed by majority rule. White majority rule. Everybody wasn't heard then and everybody won't be heard now.

I'm not opposed to raising tensions because this crap has gone on too long anyway. It's absurd to suggest as Mrs. Pigpen has that we need to wait "years" to decide if the statues should stay or go. That's garbage. The Confederacy was an assemblage of treasonous traitors to the United States and every aspect of it should be wiped any like a puppy's piddle on a white carpet.

Besides, if it's not important to you, why do you have an opinion either way?


To address what's in bold first, if you're referencing me, I didn't suggest that, I said if it were up to me I'd arrange a vote to let majority rule on a local level, perhaps there are even other ways as well. Mrs. Pigpen can speak for herself and share her own views.

Where you said this...

QUOTE
But not all opinions of all race matter equally. If they did, there would be no Confederate statues anywhere but private property, which is where they belong if they aren't all trashed entirely. The statues weren't installed by having a vote. They were installed by majority rule. White majority rule. Everybody wasn't heard then and everybody won't be heard now.


Those opinions don't matter equally to a fair chunk of people, but different biases from various racial and political groups offset a lot of that. When referencing the importance of the opinions African Americans and other minority groups (generally speaking), some of them have prejudices of their own to deal with, all races suffer from that to some degree. Whites certainly often have those issues to deal with as well but I think it's fair to mention that minority groups do get a lot of support from whites on a number of issues.

43% of them voted for Obama in 2012, which was more than they voted other Democrats running for office in recent history from my recollect. Same would be true of abolishing slavery and ending segregation, cooperation between whites and blacks was needed given the overwhelming number of whites and the control they had over our police forces, military, government etc. etc. I don't say that because I think you should be thanking whites for how much freedom you have, those things shouldn't have happened to begin with but for the purpose of this discussion, it's relevant.

In relation to voting on these memorials, what I proposed would likely be opposed by a fair amount of people who want to keep Confederate Monuments up. Apparently, Virginia cites don't even have the authority to remove them....

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/vir...erate-monuments

A vote doesn't hand things over to those who want monuments and memorials removed, but I have little doubt that it would lead to many of them coming down. I get the feeling that you think that voting would be unfair due to a lack of black voters in areas with these type of monuments, I think it'd be interesting to see how many of these are in blue counties. 1 in 12 of Confederate Memorials are in union states, in regards to the south I think it'd often depend on the size of the city. Even in the south, highly populated counties tend to be blue counties. Leftist and Democrats are usually drawn to cities and monuments are usually built in towns or cities with sufficient size to have viewers. So, in short, the outcome would likely be split between towns and cities.

Ultimately, I think that any given area with a majority of people who are bothered by the statues, that those people should be heard and vice versa. It's not perfect, either way, some people are going to be upset, where I'm coming from is wanting fewer people to be upset. For those who would take on the position that the only ones who want the statues left alone are white supremacist, they'd be wrong. Granted that for some people, that phrase has taken on a broad enough meaning to simply refer to a conservative or Trump supporter. So as far as they're concerned, the right is more diverse than those types are willing to acknowledge. One of the core principals of conservatism is to leave history alone unless it absolutely needs to be changed and that applies to a number of topics which aren't racial in nature. Often I think they're in the right, I'm a moderate and probably agree with them 60% of the time but they often miss the mark as well. This issue I feel is a tricky one, where everybody is pulling in opposite directions, that's America in the 2000's for you.

QUOTE(net2007)
I remember some of our debates very well, I'd say you're a skilled researcher but I don't think you'll ever be satisfied and remain resentful if the vast majority of that research is focused on cases where you feel white people have done something unfair to black people. I think it's important to understand history including understanding things which could harm us and that these type of topics should be mentioned and discussed because we can learn from our mistakes. However, you'll also learn from the contributions other races have made. Not to minimize the message behind your avatar but America is defined by more than things like slavery, suppression, and racism. That's a part of America's history, some of which lingers today, but although those things are a part of our country, they don't define it.


QUOTE
That's a pretty sentiment. But its also pretty naive and naivete is neither useful or helpful. America is defined by its best and its worst and among its worst are slavery, suppression and racism. I'd add White Supremacy to that as well including the White Supremacist stinking up the Oval Office even now.

Satisfied? Why would I ever be satisfied? You see MLK's dream come true? I haven't. You see the end of crappy schools, prisons filled to bursting, cops killing and getting away with shooting unarmed Black people, voter suppression and disenfranchisement schemes planned and perpetrated by Republican politicians, or drugs and guns flooding into urban neighborhoods as Black bodies flood out?

I don't think I'll ever be satisfied because I don't America will ever stop being a bastion of bigotry, racism and White supremacy. You see that as a part of America's history that has receded with the passage of time. I see it as a part of America's present and America's future. That's not me being "resentful." That's me connecting the dots and seeing a much bigger and bleaker picture of this country than you do. It's not that I'm a skilled researcher that I know this. It's that I don't need 28 days in February to know Black history and I've never believed in American exceptionalism and I've never believed God spread all his blessings on this little piece of the Earth and blew off everywhere else.

Satisfied? What are you smoking? smoke.gif


Fair enough on the point of America being defined by the best and worst it has to offer, I should have expanded. That's something I very much believe, let me just say that America isn't defined simply by the worst it has to offer alone. What I'm trying to get out here is that I think there's an inherent danger in focusing the vast majority of our energy on the negative aspects of another race, sex, political group, etc. etc. It's something that's prone to giving an incomplete picture of that group.

Beleive me, I sometimes have to come back down and check my situation when I start to criticise the political left without giving credit where it's due. That's the big one for me, I think the mindset, (and actions resulting from), modern liberalism and progressivism are becoming less beneficial by the year and in some cases becoming destructive as well. I'd be able to get behind those with classical liberal beliefs if things were different, favoring individual liberties and freedoms is a good thing but I think that message has gotten lost in many respects. There are a number of things I could talk about in regards to that, but when it comes down to it I have to make sure to reset frequently and try to communicate and find common ground.


QUOTE
QUOTE(net2007)
I'm not suggesting not to discuss these topics, not that you'd listen to me anyway and I wouldn't want you to. With that said it'd be interesting to see a topic from you on something unrelated to race. I debated with you for a while at AD and I have no idea what you believe on other topics. I remember you read a book on why Republicans are wrong on every issue (paraphrasing, it's been a while), it'd be interesting if you expanded some on that with a new thread. They're certainly flawed, enough to have me vote independent during the last presidential election, but I bet I could give you a run for your money challenging the premise of that book.


Sorry, but I'm kind of focused on topics related to race. Because race matters. Even when you aren't really interested or others say its not a big deal. Mostly it's not a big deal to you until someone says or does something related to race that can't be easily ignored and then you care a little bit more. But usually only because you're annoyed at the reaction, not the provocation.

That much I recall quite clearly about entering into debates with you. I'm not nostalgic to repeat the experience.


Race does matter, I think very much. I'd say some get to the point where they're seeing a race issue where there isn't one, that I think can be a bad thing but that doesn't remove the fact that there are genuine problems to be addressed on race and on other aspects of our culture. There isn't a computer in the world with enough storage space to save all of America's culture in ones and zeros, that's for sure. I haven't always agreed with your approach and positions, and you haven't always agreed with mine, that's no secret but communication can be worked on for anyone. I won't be able to debate much longer myself, for a few weeks anyway, but for what it's worth I thought you made some good contributions here. AD, as you probably know, has lost a lot of members, if the administrators don't get involved again or stop paying the annual cost for this domain, we could lose it.

This post has been edited by net2007: Feb 13 2018, 05:40 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nighttimer
post Feb 14 2018, 12:38 AM
Post #57


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Sponsor
February 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,660
Member No.: 504
Joined: February-16-03

Gender: Undisclosed
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: Undisclosed



QUOTE(Mrs. Pigpen @ Feb 13 2018, 09:12 AM) *
QUOTE(nighttimer @ Feb 11 2018, 10:36 PM) *
QUOTE(Mrs. Pigpen)
That said (as I mentioned before) that doesn't necessarily mean it has to stand forever. But the removal process should take time (years), include the opinion of historical experts, and not come across as a reaction to the wishes of a politically motivated mob that seems to only have an interest in creating civil disharmony and unrest.
Again, there is no urgency here.


No, what you mean there is no urgency here for you. For those of us who don't see any reason to wait for years it is very urgent.


I linked to a PBS/NPR poll in this thread indicating a higher percentage of black people want the statues to remain and not be removed.


"Higher percentage," you say?

Do you think statues honoring leaders of the Confederacy should:

a. Remain as a historical symbol

b. Be removed because they are offensive to some people

c. Unsure

White:
a. 67%
b. 25%
c. 8%


Black:
a. 44%
b. 40%
c. 16%


I find it more interesting you ignore a higher percentage---67 percent of Whites---are comfortable rolling with the racist leftovers of the defeated and disgraced Confederacy than I do the four percent difference between Blacks that do than don't. It's a sad, stupid poll that sadly reflects how stupidly many Americans suffer from the mass delusion they share neither culpability or benefit from the oppression of one group over another.

But then again it's a sad and stupid time in America. Look no further for proof than the vagina-grabbing, balding Bigot-In-Chief at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mrs. Pigpen
post Feb 14 2018, 01:27 AM
Post #58


Group Icon

**********
Carpe noctum

Sponsor
June 2003

Group: Moderators
Posts: 7,308
Member No.: 598
Joined: March-12-03

Gender: Female
Politics: Slightly Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE(nighttimer @ Feb 13 2018, 08:38 PM) *
White:
a. 67%
b. 25%
c. 8%


Black:
a. 44%
b. 40%
c. 16%


I find it more interesting you ignore a higher percentage---67 percent of Whites---are comfortable rolling with the racist leftovers of the defeated and disgraced Confederacy than I do the four percent difference between Blacks that do than don't. It's a sad, stupid poll that sadly reflects how stupidly many Americans suffer from the mass delusion they share neither culpability or benefit from the oppression of one group over another.

But then again it's a sad and stupid time in America. Look no further for proof than the vagina-grabbing, balding Bigot-In-Chief at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.


I have no idea what you're talking about here. I'm not ignoring anything...I'm the one who posted the link to poll. It is a fact that more black people want the statues up than want them to be removed. Which means, I'm far from the only person who believes there is no urgency on the matter (a majority even, among all races, agree with me).
We're all sad, stupid folk I guess. Not so enlightened as you.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nighttimer
post Feb 14 2018, 01:44 AM
Post #59


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Sponsor
February 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,660
Member No.: 504
Joined: February-16-03

Gender: Undisclosed
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: Undisclosed



QUOTE(net2007 @ Feb 13 2018, 01:33 PM) *
To address what's in bold first, if you're referencing me, I didn't suggest that, I said if it were up to me I'd arrange a vote to let majority rule on a local level, perhaps there are even other ways as well. Mrs. Pigpen can speak for herself and share her own views.


I wasn't referencing you. I was referencing Mrs. Pigpen's "these things take time" point. What I was referencing is your suggestion of leaving up to "majority rule" the symbols of a White majority triumphantly proclaiming their divine right to rule over and controls the bodies, minds and souls of a Black minority.

Majority rule when is race is factored has a tendency to favor what the majority of White people want. https://www.theroot.com/slavery-by-the-numb...790874492"%5dLast%20time%20they%20did%20that%20nearly%2013%20million%20Africans%20made%20their%20way%20to%20the%20New%20Land%20chained%20and%20lying%20in%20their%20feces%20in%20the%20cargo%20hold%20of%20ships%5b/url%5d.%20%20

QUOTE(net2007)
Those%20opinions%20don't%20matter%20equally%20to%20a%20fair%20chunk%20of%20people,%20but%20different%20biases%20from%20various%20racial%20and%20political%20groups%20offset%20a%20lot%20of%20that.%20%20When%20referencing%20the%20importance%20of%20the%20opinions%20African%20Americans%20and%20other%20minority%20groups%20(generally%20speaking),%20some%20of%20them%20have%20prejudices%20of%20their%20own%20to%20deal%20with,%20all%20races%20suffer%20from%20that%20to%20some%20degree.%20%20Whites%20certainly%20often%20have%20those%20issues%20to%20deal%20with%20as%20well%20but%20I%20think%20it's%20fair%20to%20mention%20that%20minority%20groups%20do%20get%20a%20lot%20of%20support%20from%20whites%20on%20a%20number%20of%20issues.


Then,%20it's%20equally%20fair%20to%20mention%20that%20minority%20groups%20do%20get%20a%20lot%20of%20opposition%20from%20Whites%20on%20a%20number%20of%20issues.%20%20

Nobody%20has%20ever%20said%20Blacks,%20Latinos%20and%20Asians%20and%20Native%20Americans%20don't%20have%20prejudices%20of%20their%20own.%20%20%20It's%20just%20that%20here%20in%20this%20country,%20Whites%20have%20weaponized%20their%20prejudices%20and%20bigotries%20into%20outright%20animus%20and%20bloody%20persecution%20of%20Blacks,%20Latinos,%20Asians%20and%20Native%20Americans.%20%20%20

Deal%20with%20that%20issue.%20%20

QUOTE(net2007)
43%%20of%20them%20voted%20for%20Obama%20in%202012,%20which%20was%20more%20than%20they%20voted%20other%20Democrats%20running%20for%20office%20in%20recent%20history%20from%20my%20recollect.


Well,%20from%20my%20recollect,%20%5burl="https://www.politico.com/story/2008/11/exit-polls-how-obama-won-015297" target="_blank">53% of Whites voted against Obama in 2008 and for McCain and in 2012 it grew to 57% of Whites who voted against Obama and for Romney, so if you have a point to make here about how enlightened White people are because a minority among them chose to vote for the Black guy, why don't you make it?

QUOTE(net2007)
Same would be true of abolishing slavery and ending segregation, cooperation between whites and blacks was needed given the overwhelming number of whites and the control they had over our police forces, military, government etc. etc. I don't say that because I think you should be thanking whites for how much freedom you have, those things shouldn't have happened to begin with but for the purpose of this discussion, it's relevant.


Oh, don't worry. I wasn't going to thank Whites for not lynching me and allowing me to sit by little Johnny and Jane in kindergarten. No chance of that. Because you're right it IS relevant. It's relevant because you're right, net2007. Without the support of Whites abolishing slavery and ending separation wouldn't have come as soon or with as relatively low numbers of lives lost. But let's not continue to foist this fairy tale that White Americans woke up one day and realized, "Hey, slavery was bad and segregation sucks!" It came about because Black folks had finally had enough of the crap and made it clear they were going to raise seven different kinds of hell until they got their freedom through either the bullet or the ballot.

Black people have made progress. No doubting that. But hey, White folks have made even bigger progress, right, Chris Rock?

QUOTE


When we talk about race relations in America or racial progress, it's all nonsense. There are no race relations. White people were crazy. Now they're not as crazy. To say that black people have made progress would be to say they deserve what happened to them before

So, to say Obama is progress is saying that he's the first black person that is qualified to be president. That's not black progress. That's white progress. There's been black people qualified to be president for hundreds of years. If you saw Tina Turner and Ike having a lovely breakfast over there, would you say their relationship's improved? Some people would. But a smart person would go, "Oh, he stopped punching her in the face." It's not up to her. Ike and Tina Turner's relationship has nothing to do with Tina Turner. Nothing. It just doesn't. The question is, you know, my kids are smart, educated, beautiful, polite children. There have been smart, educated, beautiful, polite black children for hundreds of years. The advantage that my children have is that my children are encountering the nicest white people that America has ever produced. Let's hope America keeps producing nicer white people.


Both sides have made progress. BOTH sides. Both sides have more progress to make.

QUOTE(net2007)
Fair enough on the point of America being defined by the best and worst it has to offer, I should have expanded. That's something I very much believe, let me just say that America isn't defined simply by the worst it has to offer alone. What I'm trying to get out here is that I think there's an inherent danger in focusing the vast majority of our energy on the negative aspects of another race, sex, political group, etc. etc. It's something that's prone to giving an incomplete picture of that group.


And what makes you think I don't have a complete picture? See, that's your American exceptionalism mindset kicking in yet again. Instead of referencing a book about Republicans I read probably a decade ago, you'd benefit far more than most from reading Ta-Neshi Coates bestseller and National Book Award winner, Between the World and Me.

Perhaps there has been, at some point in history, some great power whose elevation was exempt from the violent exploitation of other human bodies. If there has been, I have yet to discover it. But this banality of violence can never excuse America, because America makes no claim to the banal. America believes itself exceptional, the greatest and noblest nation ever to exist, a lone champion standing between the white city of democracy and the terrorists, despots, barbarians, and other enemies of civilization. One cannot, at once, claim to be superhuman and then plead mortal error. I propose to take our countrymen's claims of American exceptionalism seriously, which is to say I propose subjecting our country to an exceptional moral standard. This is difficult because there exists, all around us, an apparatus urging us to accept American innocence at face value and not to inquire too much

The forgetting is habit, is yet another necessary component of the Dream. They have forgotten the scale of theft that enriched them in slavery; the terror that allowed them, for a century, to pilfer the vote; the segregationist policy that gave them their suburbs. They have forgotten, because to remember would tumble them out of the beautiful Dream and force them to live down here with us, down here in the world. I am convinced that the Dreamers, at least the Dreamers of today, would rather live white than live free. In the Dream they are Buck Rogers, Prince Aragorn, an entire race of Skywalkers. To awaken them is to reveal that they are an empire of humans and, like all empires of humans, are built on the destruction of the body. It is to stain their nobility, to make them vulnerable, fallible, breakable humans.

And for so long I have wanted to escape into the Dream, to fold my country over my head like a blanket. But this has never been an option because the Dream rests on our backs, the bedding made from our bodies.

Coates would probably agree with George Carlin that the problem with The American Dream is you have to be asleep to believe it. I don't and I'm wide awake.

QUOTE(net2007)
AD, as you probably know, has lost a lot of members, if the administrators don't get involved again or stop paying the annual cost for this domain, we could lose it.


What exactly is it you think you'd be losing, net2007? The AD you and I once were part of is long gone and all you have to do is look at this board's launch page and it tells you this place is one step away from being just another dead weblink in the Wayback Machine.

There are livelier places to drink. beer.gif Or debate. Everyone gone from this board ain't gone from the world, y'know. I'm the proof of that.


QUOTE(net2007 @ Feb 13 2018, 01:33 PM) *
To address what's in bold first, if you're referencing me, I didn't suggest that, I said if it were up to me I'd arrange a vote to let majority rule on a local level, perhaps there are even other ways as well. Mrs. Pigpen can speak for herself and share her own views.


I wasn't referencing you. I was referencing Mrs. Pigpen's "these things take time" point. What I was referencing is your suggestion of leaving up to "majority rule" the symbols of a White majority triumphantly proclaiming their divine right to rule over and controls the bodies, minds and souls of a Black minority.

Majority rule when is race is factored has a tendency to favor what the majority of White people want. Last time they did that nearly 13 million Africans made their way to the New Land chained and lying in their feces in the cargo hold of ships.

QUOTE(net2007)
Those opinions don't matter equally to a fair chunk of people, but different biases from various racial and political groups offset a lot of that. When referencing the importance of the opinions African Americans and other minority groups (generally speaking), some of them have prejudices of their own to deal with, all races suffer from that to some degree. Whites certainly often have those issues to deal with as well but I think it's fair to mention that minority groups do get a lot of support from whites on a number of issues.


Then, it's equally fair to mention that minority groups do get a lot of opposition from Whites on a number of issues.

Nobody has ever said Blacks, Latinos and Asians and Native Americans don't have prejudices of their own. It's just that here in this country, Whites have weaponized their prejudices and bigotries into outright animus and bloody persecution of Blacks, Latinos, Asians and Native Americans.

Deal with that issue.

QUOTE(net2007)
43% of them voted for Obama in 2012, which was more than they voted other Democrats running for office in recent history from my recollect.


Well, from my recollect, 53% of Whites voted against Obama in 2008 and for McCain and in 2012 it grew to 57% of Whites who voted against Obama and for Romney, so if you have a point to make here about how enlightened White people are because a minority among them chose to vote for the Black guy, why don't you make it?

QUOTE(net2007)
Same would be true of abolishing slavery and ending segregation, cooperation between whites and blacks was needed given the overwhelming number of whites and the control they had over our police forces, military, government etc. etc. I don't say that because I think you should be thanking whites for how much freedom you have, those things shouldn't have happened to begin with but for the purpose of this discussion, it's relevant.


Oh, don't worry. I wasn't going to thank Whites for not lynching me and allowing me to sit by little Johnny and Jane in kindergarten. No chance of that. Because you're right it IS relevant. It's relevant because you're right, net2007. Without the support of Whites abolishing slavery and ending separation wouldn't have come as soon or with as relatively low numbers of lives lost. But let's not continue to foist this fairy tale that White Americans woke up one day and realized, "Hey, slavery was bad and segregation sucks!" It came about because Black folks had finally had enough of the crap and made it clear they were going to raise seven different kinds of hell until they got their freedom through either the bullet or the ballot.

Black people have made progress. No doubting that. But hey, White folks have made even bigger progress, right, Chris Rock?

QUOTE


When we talk about race relations in America or racial progress, it's all nonsense. There are no race relations. White people were crazy. Now they're not as crazy. To say that black people have made progress would be to say they deserve what happened to them before

So, to say Obama is progress is saying that he's the first black person that is qualified to be president. That's not black progress. That's white progress. There's been black people qualified to be president for hundreds of years. If you saw Tina Turner and Ike having a lovely breakfast over there, would you say their relationship's improved? Some people would. But a smart person would go, "Oh, he stopped punching her in the face." It's not up to her. Ike and Tina Turner's relationship has nothing to do with Tina Turner. Nothing. It just doesn't. The question is, you know, my kids are smart, educated, beautiful, polite children. There have been smart, educated, beautiful, polite black children for hundreds of years. The advantage that my children have is that my children are encountering the nicest white people that America has ever produced. Let's hope America keeps producing nicer white people.


Both sides have made progress. BOTH sides. Both sides have more progress to make.

QUOTE(net2007)
Fair enough on the point of America being defined by the best and worst it has to offer, I should have expanded. That's something I very much believe, let me just say that America isn't defined simply by the worst it has to offer alone. What I'm trying to get out here is that I think there's an inherent danger in focusing the vast majority of our energy on the negative aspects of another race, sex, political group, etc. etc. It's something that's prone to giving an incomplete picture of that group.


And what makes you think I don't have a complete picture? See, that's your American exceptionalism mindset kicking in yet again. Instead of referencing a book about Republicans I read probably a decade ago, you'd benefit far more than most from reading Ta-Neshi Coates bestseller and National Book Award winner, Between the World and Me.

Perhaps there has been, at some point in history, some great power whose elevation was exempt from the violent exploitation of other human bodies. If there has been, I have yet to discover it. But this banality of violence can never excuse America, because America makes no claim to the banal. America believes itself exceptional, the greatest and noblest nation ever to exist, a lone champion standing between the white city of democracy and the terrorists, despots, barbarians, and other enemies of civilization. One cannot, at once, claim to be superhuman and then plead mortal error. I propose to take our countrymen's claims of American exceptionalism seriously, which is to say I propose subjecting our country to an exceptional moral standard. This is difficult because there exists, all around us, an apparatus urging us to accept American innocence at face value and not to inquire too much

The forgetting is habit, is yet another necessary component of the Dream. They have forgotten the scale of theft that enriched them in slavery; the terror that allowed them, for a century, to pilfer the vote; the segregationist policy that gave them their suburbs. They have forgotten, because to remember would tumble them out of the beautiful Dream and force them to live down here with us, down here in the world. I am convinced that the Dreamers, at least the Dreamers of today, would rather live white than live free. In the Dream they are Buck Rogers, Prince Aragorn, an entire race of Skywalkers. To awaken them is to reveal that they are an empire of humans and, like all empires of humans, are built on the destruction of the body. It is to stain their nobility, to make them vulnerable, fallible, breakable humans.

And for so long I have wanted to escape into the Dream, to fold my country over my head like a blanket. But this has never been an option because the Dream rests on our backs, the bedding made from our bodies.

Coates would probably agree with George Carlin that the problem with The American Dream is you have to be asleep to believe it. I don't and I'm wide awake.

QUOTE(net2007)
AD, as you probably know, has lost a lot of members, if the administrators don't get involved again or stop paying the annual cost for this domain, we could lose it.


What exactly is it you think you'd be losing, net2007? The AD you and I once were part of is long gone and all you have to do is look at this board's launch page and it tells you this place is one step away from being just another dead weblink in the Wayback Machine.

There are livelier places to drink. beer.gif Or debate. Everyone gone from this board ain't gone from the world, y'know. I'm the proof of that.

QUOTE(net2007 @ Feb 13 2018, 01:33 PM) *
To address what's in bold first, if you're referencing me, I didn't suggest that, I said if it were up to me I'd arrange a vote to let majority rule on a local level, perhaps there are even other ways as well. Mrs. Pigpen can speak for herself and share her own views.


I wasn't referencing you. I was referencing Mrs. Pigpen's "these things take time" point. What I was referencing is your suggestion of leaving up to "majority rule" the symbols of a White majority triumphantly proclaiming their divine right to rule over and controls the bodies, minds and souls of a Black minority.

Majority rule when is race is factored has a tendency to favor what the majority of White people want. Last time they did that nearly 13 million Africans made their way to the New Land chained and lying in their feces in the cargo hold of ships.

QUOTE(net2007)
Those opinions don't matter equally to a fair chunk of people, but different biases from various racial and political groups offset a lot of that. When referencing the importance of the opinions African Americans and other minority groups (generally speaking), some of them have prejudices of their own to deal with, all races suffer from that to some degree. Whites certainly often have those issues to deal with as well but I think it's fair to mention that minority groups do get a lot of support from whites on a number of issues.


Then, it's equally fair to mention that minority groups do get a lot of opposition from Whites on a number of issues.

Nobody has ever said Blacks, Latinos and Asians and Native Americans don't have prejudices of their own. It's just that here in this country, Whites have weaponized their prejudices and bigotries into outright animus and bloody persecution of Blacks, Latinos, Asians and Native Americans.

Deal with that issue.

QUOTE(net2007)
43% of them voted for Obama in 2012, which was more than they voted other Democrats running for office in recent history from my recollect.


Well, from my recollect, 53% of Whites voted against Obama in 2008 and for McCain and in 2012 it grew to 57% of Whites who voted against Obama and for Romney, so if you have a point to make here about how enlightened White people are because a minority among them chose to vote for the Black guy, why don't you make it?

QUOTE(net2007)
Same would be true of abolishing slavery and ending segregation, cooperation between whites and blacks was needed given the overwhelming number of whites and the control they had over our police forces, military, government etc. etc. I don't say that because I think you should be thanking whites for how much freedom you have, those things shouldn't have happened to begin with but for the purpose of this discussion, it's relevant.


Oh, don't worry. I wasn't going to thank Whites for not lynching me and allowing me to sit by little Johnny and Jane in kindergarten. No chance of that. Because you're right it IS relevant. It's relevant because you're right, net2007. Without the support of Whites abolishing slavery and ending separation wouldn't have come as soon or with as relatively low numbers of lives lost. But let's not continue to foist this fairy tale that White Americans woke up one day and realized, "Hey, slavery was bad and segregation sucks!" It came about because Black folks had finally had enough of the crap and made it clear they were going to raise seven different kinds of hell until they got their freedom through either the bullet or the ballot.

Black people have made progress. No doubting that. But hey, White folks have made even bigger progress, right, Chris Rock?

QUOTE


When we talk about race relations in America or racial progress, it's all nonsense. There are no race relations. White people were crazy. Now they're not as crazy. To say that black people have made progress would be to say they deserve what happened to them before

So, to say Obama is progress is saying that he's the first black person that is qualified to be president. That's not black progress. That's white progress. There's been black people qualified to be president for hundreds of years. If you saw Tina Turner and Ike having a lovely breakfast over there, would you say their relationship's improved? Some people would. But a smart person would go, "Oh, he stopped punching her in the face." It's not up to her. Ike and Tina Turner's relationship has nothing to do with Tina Turner. Nothing. It just doesn't. The question is, you know, my kids are smart, educated, beautiful, polite children. There have been smart, educated, beautiful, polite black children for hundreds of years. The advantage that my children have is that my children are encountering the nicest white people that America has ever produced. Let's hope America keeps producing nicer white people.


Both sides have made progress. BOTH sides. Both sides have more progress to make.

QUOTE(net2007)
Fair enough on the point of America being defined by the best and worst it has to offer, I should have expanded. That's something I very much believe, let me just say that America isn't defined simply by the worst it has to offer alone. What I'm trying to get out here is that I think there's an inherent danger in focusing the vast majority of our energy on the negative aspects of another race, sex, political group, etc. etc. It's something that's prone to giving an incomplete picture of that group.


And what makes you think I don't have a complete picture? See, that's your American exceptionalism mindset kicking in yet again. Instead of referencing a book about Republicans I read probably a decade ago, you'd benefit far more than most from reading Ta-Neshi Coates bestseller and National Book Award winner, Between the World and Me.

Perhaps there has been, at some point in history, some great power whose elevation was exempt from the violent exploitation of other human bodies. If there has been, I have yet to discover it. But this banality of violence can never excuse America, because America makes no claim to the banal. America believes itself exceptional, the greatest and noblest nation ever to exist, a lone champion standing between the white city of democracy and the terrorists, despots, barbarians, and other enemies of civilization. One cannot, at once, claim to be superhuman and then plead mortal error. I propose to take our countrymen's claims of American exceptionalism seriously, which is to say I propose subjecting our country to an exceptional moral standard. This is difficult because there exists, all around us, an apparatus urging us to accept American innocence at face value and not to inquire too much

The forgetting is habit, is yet another necessary component of the Dream. They have forgotten the scale of theft that enriched them in slavery; the terror that allowed them, for a century, to pilfer the vote; the segregationist policy that gave them their suburbs. They have forgotten, because to remember would tumble them out of the beautiful Dream and force them to live down here with us, down here in the world. I am convinced that the Dreamers, at least the Dreamers of today, would rather live white than live free. In the Dream they are Buck Rogers, Prince Aragorn, an entire race of Skywalkers. To awaken them is to reveal that they are an empire of humans and, like all empires of humans, are built on the destruction of the body. It is to stain their nobility, to make them vulnerable, fallible, breakable humans.

And for so long I have wanted to escape into the Dream, to fold my country over my head like a blanket. But this has never been an option because the Dream rests on our backs, the bedding made from our bodies.

Coates would probably agree with George Carlin that the problem with The American Dream is you have to be asleep to believe it. I don't and I'm wide awake.

QUOTE(net2007)
AD, as you probably know, has lost a lot of members, if the administrators don't get involved again or stop paying the annual cost for this domain, we could lose it.


What exactly is it you think you'd be losing, net2007? The AD you and I once were part of is long gone and all you have to do is look at this board's launch page and it tells you this place is one step away from being just another dead weblink in the Wayback Machine.

There are livelier places to drink. beer.gif Or debate. Everyone gone from this board ain't gone from the world, y'know. I'm the proof of that.

QUOTE(net2007 @ Feb 13 2018, 01:33 PM) *
To address what's in bold first, if you're referencing me, I didn't suggest that, I said if it were up to me I'd arrange a vote to let majority rule on a local level, perhaps there are even other ways as well. Mrs. Pigpen can speak for herself and share her own views.


I wasn't referencing you. I was referencing Mrs. Pigpen's "these things take time" point. What I was referencing is your suggestion of leaving up to "majority rule" the symbols of a White majority triumphantly proclaiming their divine right to rule over and controls the bodies, minds and souls of a Black minority.

Majority rule when is race is factored has a tendency to favor what the majority of White people want. Last time they did that nearly 13 million Africans made their way to the New Land chained and lying in their feces in the cargo hold of ships.

QUOTE(net2007)
Those opinions don't matter equally to a fair chunk of people, but different biases from various racial and political groups offset a lot of that. When referencing the importance of the opinions African Americans and other minority groups (generally speaking), some of them have prejudices of their own to deal with, all races suffer from that to some degree. Whites certainly often have those issues to deal with as well but I think it's fair to mention that minority groups do get a lot of support from whites on a number of issues.


Then, it's equally fair to mention that minority groups do get a lot of opposition from Whites on a number of issues.

Nobody has ever said Blacks, Latinos and Asians and Native Americans don't have prejudices of their own. It's just that here in this country, Whites have weaponized their prejudices and bigotries into outright animus and bloody persecution of Blacks, Latinos, Asians and Native Americans.

Deal with that issue.

QUOTE(net2007)
43% of them voted for Obama in 2012, which was more than they voted other Democrats running for office in recent history from my recollect.


Well, from my recollect, 53% of Whites voted against Obama in 2008 and for McCain and in 2012 it grew to 57% of Whites who voted against Obama and for Romney, so if you have a point to make here about how enlightened White people are because a minority among them chose to vote for the Black guy, why don't you make it?

QUOTE(net2007)
Same would be true of abolishing slavery and ending segregation, cooperation between whites and blacks was needed given the overwhelming number of whites and the control they had over our police forces, military, government etc. etc. I don't say that because I think you should be thanking whites for how much freedom you have, those things shouldn't have happened to begin with but for the purpose of this discussion, it's relevant.


Oh, don't worry. I wasn't going to thank Whites for not lynching me and allowing me to sit by little Johnny and Jane in kindergarten. No chance of that. Because you're right it IS relevant. It's relevant because you're right, net2007. Without the support of Whites abolishing slavery and ending separation wouldn't have come as soon or with as relatively low numbers of lives lost. But let's not continue to foist this fairy tale that White Americans woke up one day and realized, "Hey, slavery was bad and segregation sucks!" It came about because Black folks had finally had enough of the crap and made it clear they were going to raise seven different kinds of hell until they got their freedom through either the bullet or the ballot.

Black people have made progress. No doubting that. But hey, White folks have made even bigger progress, right, Chris Rock?

QUOTE


When we talk about race relations in America or racial progress, it's all nonsense. There are no race relations. White people were crazy. Now they're not as crazy. To say that black people have made progress would be to say they deserve what happened to them before

So, to say Obama is progress is saying that he's the first black person that is qualified to be president. That's not black progress. That's white progress. There's been black people qualified to be president for hundreds of years. If you saw Tina Turner and Ike having a lovely breakfast over there, would you say their relationship's improved? Some people would. But a smart person would go, "Oh, he stopped punching her in the face." It's not up to her. Ike and Tina Turner's relationship has nothing to do with Tina Turner. Nothing. It just doesn't. The question is, you know, my kids are smart, educated, beautiful, polite children. There have been smart, educated, beautiful, polite black children for hundreds of years. The advantage that my children have is that my children are encountering the nicest white people that America has ever produced. Let's hope America keeps producing nicer white people.


Both sides have made progress. BOTH sides. Both sides have more progress to make.

QUOTE(net2007)
Fair enough on the point of America being defined by the best and worst it has to offer, I should have expanded. That's something I very much believe, let me just say that America isn't defined simply by the worst it has to offer alone. What I'm trying to get out here is that I think there's an inherent danger in focusing the vast majority of our energy on the negative aspects of another race, sex, political group, etc. etc. It's something that's prone to giving an incomplete picture of that group.


And what makes you think I don't have a complete picture? See, that's your American exceptionalism mindset kicking in yet again. Instead of referencing a book about Republicans I read probably a decade ago, you'd benefit far more than most from reading Ta-Neshi Coates bestseller and National Book Award winner, Between the World and Me.

Perhaps there has been, at some point in history, some great power whose elevation was exempt from the violent exploitation of other human bodies. If there has been, I have yet to discover it. But this banality of violence can never excuse America, because America makes no claim to the banal. America believes itself exceptional, the greatest and noblest nation ever to exist, a lone champion standing between the white city of democracy and the terrorists, despots, barbarians, and other enemies of civilization. One cannot, at once, claim to be superhuman and then plead mortal error. I propose to take our countrymen's claims of American exceptionalism seriously, which is to say I propose subjecting our country to an exceptional moral standard. This is difficult because there exists, all around us, an apparatus urging us to accept American innocence at face value and not to inquire too much

The forgetting is habit, is yet another necessary component of the Dream. They have forgotten the scale of theft that enriched them in slavery; the terror that allowed them, for a century, to pilfer the vote; the segregationist policy that gave them their suburbs. They have forgotten, because to remember would tumble them out of the beautiful Dream and force them to live down here with us, down here in the world. I am convinced that the Dreamers, at least the Dreamers of today, would rather live white than live free. In the Dream they are Buck Rogers, Prince Aragorn, an entire race of Skywalkers. To awaken them is to reveal that they are an empire of humans and, like all empires of humans, are built on the destruction of the body. It is to stain their nobility, to make them vulnerable, fallible, breakable humans.

And for so long I have wanted to escape into the Dream, to fold my country over my head like a blanket. But this has never been an option because the Dream rests on our backs, the bedding made from our bodies.

Coates would probably agree with George Carlin that the problem with The American Dream is you have to be asleep to believe it. I don't and I'm wide awake.

QUOTE(net2007)
AD, as you probably know, has lost a lot of members, if the administrators don't get involved again or stop paying the annual cost for this domain, we could lose it.


What exactly is it you think you'd be losing, net2007? The AD you and I once were part of is long gone and all you have to do is look at this board's launch page and it tells you this place is one step away from being just another dead weblink in the Wayback Machine.

There are livelier places to drink. beer.gif Or debate. Everyone gone from this board ain't gone from the world, y'know. I'm the proof of that.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
droop224
post Feb 15 2018, 02:06 PM
Post #60


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 2,808
Member No.: 3,073
Joined: May-12-04

Gender: Male
Politics: Very Liberal
Party affiliation: None



QUOTE(Net2007)
Those opinions don't matter equally to a fair chunk of people, but different biases from various racial and political groups offset a lot of that. When referencing the importance of the opinions African Americans and other minority groups (generally speaking), some of them have prejudices of their own to deal with, all races suffer from that to some degree. Whites certainly often have those issues to deal with as well but I think it's fair to mention that minority groups do get a lot of support from whites on a number of issues.

43% of them voted for Obama in 2012, which was more than they voted other Democrats running for office in recent history from my recollect. Same would be true of abolishing slavery and ending segregation, cooperation between whites and blacks was needed given the overwhelming number of whites and the control they had over our police forces, military, government etc. etc. I don't say that because I think you should be thanking whites for how much freedom you have, those things shouldn't have happened to begin with but for the purpose of this discussion, it's relevant.



No you aren't saying we should be thanking Whites, but man I read this and reread this and its hard not to think that you aren't saying we shouldn't be thankful for Whites, at least the understanding ones. And I admit, these are not the words you are using, quite the opposite. I don't know what the word is for what you do, is it providing false equivalencies; is it equivocating? I'm not sure, Net. Whatever it is this is a good example.

You start off by replying to NT comment about opinions matter, you do so in such a "well every race has prejudices to deal with no group worse or better than the other" type of way.

You then follow that up with percentage to show how many Whites voted for Obama (there is a reason you think that's important) You then bring up the cooperation of Whites to abolish slavery (there is a reason you think this important). But maybe you since the tone of what you are writing... or maybe you want us to understand what you ARE NOT saying... cause then you state:

"I don't say that because I think you should be thanking whites for how much freedom you have, those things shouldn't have happened to begin with but for the purpose of this discussion, it's relevant?

Relevant how? Because all you stated before you said "I don't think you should be thanking Whites" comment was basically telling NT he should be doing just that. Call it thanking them, being grateful, being appreciative.

It takes 0, zilch, none, zero (spelled out) effort or cooperation from Blacks, Latinos, or any other minority group for Whites to stop being oppressive. There is no effort we should have to commit, to get you to understand your racism and acts of oppression. The statues are up and these statues are of men that fought to enslave Blacks when the country was moving away from slavery.

Racism created the institution of slavery as it worked in this country; racism created the confederacy; racism created the heroes of the confederacy; racism is why those statues were put up in the first place, decades after the civil war. And what do you think keeps those statues up? Let me guess, a love of history!! w00t.gif

Let me take a play out your playbook... I'm not saying that everyone that wants the confederate statues to stay up or think we should take our time pulling them down are racist individuals, I'm just saying racism is the determining and most relevant factor that keeps those statues up.

This post has been edited by droop224: Feb 15 2018, 02:10 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

  
Go to the top of the page - Simple Version Time is now: February 25th, 2018 - 03:13 PM
©2002-2010 America's Debate, Inc.  All rights reserved.