Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Reports of protests are overblown. A few incidents around the country, but nothing major.

5 (45.5%)

A few major incidents in capitals, but nothing much in DC.

5 (45.5%)

A major incident in DC, but nothing much around the country.

0 (0%)

More than 10 capitals have major upheavals, but nothing much in DC.

0 (0%)

A major incident in DC plus more than 10 capitals with significant upheavals.

1 (9.1%)

More than half the capitals around the country have problems with protesters, but DC is quiet.

0 (0%)

DC has major problems, while more than half the capitals around the country also have considerable trouble with protesters.

0 (0%)

Huge disruption to the day.

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 9

Voting closed: January 19, 2021, 10:49:21 PM

[Hamilton Samuels]

We can appreciate him fully warts and all and keep his various monuments. It’s not hard.

Andrew Jackson is a piece of shit.

He can have a urinal next to the one with trump’s hideous face....

I think "warts" is key to this whole debate.   If they did more good than harm,  maybe keep monuments and street names and buildings, and put up plaques that describe how they were a mix of good and bad,  products of their historical era.   

Who would be in charge of ranking the “ warts”

You don't need someone "in charge". you'd need a group representative of the community to agree on what is appropriate, and a review committee to periodically meet to see how that original judgement has been sustained, or not.

Of course, you'd have to be serious about making such an attempt to be inclusive and honorable at the same time.
So, that means that the idea of someone being "in charge" goes out the window. And it becomes the community itself determining what it believes represents the best of its members, with out disrespecting anyone.

[REDSTATEWARD]

The issue of Woodrow Wilson's history seems to have prompted some... reactions as if this were a new topic coming out of the blue. This is a 7 year old article on the topic, no longer on BU's site so I had to dig a little for it. (Not too much - I knew where to dig.)

https://web.archive.org/web/20160221070645/http://www.bu.edu/professorvoices/2013/03/04/the-long-forgotten-racial-attitudes-and-policies-of-woodrow-wilson/

Two years after, the issue of removing Woodrow Wilson's name came to the fore:
https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/eight-different-editorials-about-princetons-woodrow-wilson-controversy

It took 5 years to get there, but it has finally arrived.

Just don't think that it sprung out of nowhere.

LOL
We’ve known about the slaves of Washington, Jefferson, Jackson, et al for hundreds of years. 

This whole subject simply evades you.

[barton]

Haha!   Yep,  my guess is that Boz,  Bo, and Kam are the youngest members who post in politics,  and none of them are all that young,  either.   I won't say my precise age,  but there's a famous Beatles song about it.

“I Saw Her Standing There”?

That would make me 28 years your senior. If it’s the other one, I’m 19 years your junior.

If it's the first one,  my marching in Vietnam protests and the first Earth Day was truly a triumph of applied wormhole technology.   

Every summer we rent a cottage in the Isle of Wight.  Where I work on my GED...

[Hamilton Samuels]

The issue of Woodrow Wilson's history seems to have prompted some... reactions as if this were a new topic coming out of the blue. This is a 7 year old article on the topic, no longer on BU's site so I had to dig a little for it. (Not too much - I knew where to dig.)

https://web.archive.org/web/20160221070645/http://www.bu.edu/professorvoices/2013/03/04/the-long-forgotten-racial-attitudes-and-policies-of-woodrow-wilson/

Two years after, the issue of removing Woodrow Wilson's name came to the fore:
https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/eight-different-editorials-about-princetons-woodrow-wilson-controversy

It took 5 years to get there, but it has finally arrived.

Just don't think that it sprung out of nowhere.

LOL
We’ve known about the slaves of Washington, Jefferson, Jackson, et al for hundreds of years. 

This whole subject simply evades you.

Are you defending bigotry or condemning it? Because that is the subject.

[Hairy Lime]

Just read about 9 pages of vitriol here.

There are no women on this forum.

And the testosterone infused arguments generally just lead to personal insults.

Newsflash -- heated arguments do not require testosterone.  (and given what I suspect is the average age on this forum,  and that testosterone level drops pretty steadily from age 30 onward,  I really doubt that little hormone is the culprit)

Don’t forget  Barton  once passed a high school biology course.

Too bad you didn't. And couldn't.

[Hairy Lime]

The issue of Woodrow Wilson's history seems to have prompted some... reactions as if this were a new topic coming out of the blue. This is a 7 year old article on the topic, no longer on BU's site so I had to dig a little for it. (Not too much - I knew where to dig.)

https://web.archive.org/web/20160221070645/http://www.bu.edu/professorvoices/2013/03/04/the-long-forgotten-racial-attitudes-and-policies-of-woodrow-wilson/

Two years after, the issue of removing Woodrow Wilson's name came to the fore:
https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/eight-different-editorials-about-princetons-woodrow-wilson-controversy

It took 5 years to get there, but it has finally arrived.

Just don't think that it sprung out of nowhere.

LOL
We’ve known about the slaves of Washington, Jefferson, Jackson, et al for hundreds of years. 

This whole subject simply evades you.

Are you defending bigotry or condemning it? Because that is the subject.

I think he is personifying it.

[barton]

We can appreciate him fully warts and all and keep his various monuments. It’s not hard.

Andrew Jackson is a piece of shit.

He can have a urinal next to the one with trump’s hideous face....

I think "warts" is key to this whole debate.   If they did more good than harm,  maybe keep monuments and street names and buildings, and put up plaques that describe how they were a mix of good and bad,  products of their historical era.   

Who would be in charge of ranking the “ warts”

You don't need someone "in charge". you'd need a group representative of the community to agree on what is appropriate, and a review committee to periodically meet to see how that original judgement has been sustained, or not.

Of course, you'd have to be serious about making such an attempt to be inclusive and honorable at the same time.
So, that means that the idea of someone being "in charge" goes out the window. And it becomes the community itself determining what it believes represents the best of its members, with out disrespecting anyone.

If someone murdered hundreds of thousands of indigenous peoples,  I'd guess you don't need a dermatologist to spot that large wart.

Generally,  agree about community standards and healthy dialog and I would suggest a conversation about how to define demarcation between figures of historical interest and figures that are to be presented as heroic/inspirational.   General Lee, compared to Jackson, is a more difficult mix of honorable and loathesome.   Maybe museum worthy but not town square worthy.

 Personally,  I've never been much impressed by George Washington and all his legal loophole hunting to keep his many slaves while in Pennsylvania.   If the Lakota want to take down Rushmore, I'll help with the George head -- don't tell Ward,  but my college chemistry studies gave me serious bomb making skills.   (possibly some testosterone involved in that last sentence)

[bankshot1]

If most white people were suddenly black they’d be fucked like the proverbial “fish out of water.”

In reverse most black people would be just fine because we already navigate through two different worlds.

But if whites were all then black,where'd be the conflict?

Inane question, but simple put, you don't think they would be happy, do you?!

I have no idea what "happy" means to most people, so I can't answer your question.

I was just curious about the hypothetical situation that was proposed. If, in fact, suddenly all whites were black, where would be the conflict based on race?

IMO, the conflict would likely then strictly be economically driven. What values would change for most whites, once they are no longer white? I doubt very many. I would think they'd still think the way they think.

Truly white people would likely still find that way to show others how "superior" they are, regardless of their new skin tone.

Humans do a ton of Us vs. Them activity regardless of race. See also: Jews, NINA, Polish jokes, Michigan vs. Ohio, Town vs. Gown, and a host of other such things. We other people pretty effectively. While they are in decline now, the Ethnic-American club and its ilk dominated one facet of the American social scene for a long time. It was/is a way to support "our own," but also to make it clear who belongs and who does not.

Think about gingers.

I often thought about Ginger. And Mary Ann.But I was just a kid, then...

Seriously, then what you are saying is that it normal for humans to discriminate.

Very.

We are not born racist. We are not even bigoted.

But we do seem to have an urge to feel superior to others, as that makes us feel better about ourselves. I could not tell you if that is hard-wired or a product of Western Culture (tm). I have studied the question and am not satisfied with the answer of the extent to which it is present in all other cultures, but elements of Japanese and Chinese culture suggest strongly that it is present there.

There are a lot of things that it is "normal" for humans to do, but which we have worked to overcome, to train us away from. I'm pretty sure that the desire to wipe out an offending party's group is "normal" for humans, or at least it used to be.

I'm not a scientist but I've often believed that our fear of others who are not like us is how we are hard-wired and may be instintcual, or easily adapted to at an early age. It may be a basic survival skill to be wary of those who are not a member of our tribe. And in the melting pot that we like to think of as the USA we've not yet totally evolved away from our ancient gene pool, the melting pot sometimes boils over. And it gets messy.

IMO we seem to get closer to evolving into a more decent, and open and reduced bias society, and events like Obama's election was an incredible moment in that direction. But then the backlash with Trump. IMO2 the recent events seem again to be pushing us into less tribalism and unity, and facing some ugly shit about ourselves, but there will be pushback. Two steps forward, one back, seems to be the general trend. I think that too may be instinctual and it may be how we learn.

But I sucked in biology, was good in math, go figure.

   

And Mary Ann and twice on Sunday

[facilitatorn]

Red took eugenics to fulfill his Science requirement. He followed it up with Flat Earth for Dummies.

Barton, I’ll send you a (digital) birthday greeting when appropriate. You might look elsewhere for wine and valentines.

There’s nothing on a Sunday quite like watching Red and crackers like him getting swept away by tides of history utterly beyond their comprehension or control. The miserable proxies they put forward as leaders entirely justifies their imminent extinction.

[Echo4]

https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/28/politics/lamar-alexander-trump-masks/index.html

Lamar Alexander says it would help if Trump would wear a mask.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/28/politics/hhs-alex-azar-coronavirus-rise-in-cases-cnntv/index.html

The window is closing for the US to get the coronavirus under control, says Azar.

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2020/06/28/mitch-mcconnell-mask-wearing-ndwknd-vpx.cnn

McConnell encourages wearing masks until a vaccine is found. (And distributed, presumably.)

[REDSTATEWARD]

 Personally,  I've never been much impressed by George Washington and all his legal loophole hunting to keep his many slaves while in Pennsylvania. 

Yeah.  Holding a rag- tag army together for years only to defeat the mighty British and become the Father of Our Country is way overrated by Barton standards.

[bambu.]

Just read about 9 pages of vitriol here.

There are no women on this forum.

And the testosterone infused arguments generally just lead to personal insults.

No one seems to ever concede that someone else may have a valid point.

The few Henry Fonda moments of lucid and rational thought are quickly shouted down or memed out of existence.

Really the forum needs a new title; one that captured it's true nature.

I suggest "Twelve Angry Men".

Consider these 3 quotes from that brilliant work of art, and how they seem so fitting a description of what goes on here.

"Facts may be colored by the personalities of the people who present them."


"It's very hard to keep personal prejudice out of a thing like this. And no matter where you run into it, prejudice obscures the truth."

TEN [exploding]. Bright! He's a common ignorant slob. He don't even speak good English!
ELEVEN [slowly]. He doesn't even speak good English.




Gentlemen...I ask you to consider this truth in labeling recommendation.

bambu doesn't get angry

[bambu.]

I prefer for every country in the '"Christian West" to be White majority, and every governing parliament in those countries to be White majority.
Why?
Because I've studied countries that aren't like that and I do not like what I see.

I bolded Christian,  mainly for the irony value.    What a spectacularly UNchristian post.

Take a look at Africa, the Middle East, Asia NSEW including India, Pakistan, the rest of the 'Stan' countries, Mexico, Central America, South America and tell me you'd like the USA to be them.

[Hamilton Samuels]

 Personally,  I've never been much impressed by George Washington and all his legal loophole hunting to keep his many slaves while in Pennsylvania. 

Yeah.  Holding a rag- tag army together for years only to defeat the mighty British and become the Father of Our Country is way overrated by Barton standards.

Sorta...
If not for the French, we all are sipping tea in about an hour.
Vive let France!

[Hamilton Samuels]

The issue of Woodrow Wilson's history seems to have prompted some... reactions as if this were a new topic coming out of the blue. This is a 7 year old article on the topic, no longer on BU's site so I had to dig a little for it. (Not too much - I knew where to dig.)

https://web.archive.org/web/20160221070645/http://www.bu.edu/professorvoices/2013/03/04/the-long-forgotten-racial-attitudes-and-policies-of-woodrow-wilson/

Two years after, the issue of removing Woodrow Wilson's name came to the fore:
https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/eight-different-editorials-about-princetons-woodrow-wilson-controversy

It took 5 years to get there, but it has finally arrived.

Just don't think that it sprung out of nowhere.

LOL
We’ve known about the slaves of Washington, Jefferson, Jackson, et al for hundreds of years. 

This whole subject simply evades you.

Are you defending bigotry or condemning it? Because that is the subject.

Still waiting on that answer. You do have the courage to answer it, don't you?