(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.socialmediadelivered.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2011%2F12%2Fblackhistorymonth2.jpg&hash=fadaa7688c1b7229733b768c901db8b78d7b55d1)
http://www.harcourtschool.com/activity/biographies/banneker/
QuoteBenjamin Banneker
Benjamin Banneker became a world-famous mathematician, astronomer, and inventor. He was a free man of African heritage, born in Maryland when it was still one of the 13 British colonies. Through his work and writing, Banneker tried to put an end to slavery in the early United States.
Born on November 9, 1731, Banneker was the son of two free Africans. When he was a child, Banneker's grandmother taught him to read the Bible. Until the age of 15, Banneker also attended school, where he did well in science and mathematics. He later outgrew the knowledge of his teacher and began making up his own math problems to solve. During his free time Banneker also taught himself literature, history, and advanced mathematics.
Banneker and his family lived and worked on the family's tobacco plantation, or large farm, in Maryland. Banneker's father designed an irrigation system that provided water for their crops even during droughts. This system helped make the plantation successful. Years later, wheat from the farm helped feed American soldiers during the Revolutionary War.
In 1752 a business associate of Banneker's gave him a pocket watch to study. Banneker instantly became interested in the watch and how it worked. He spent many hours taking the watch apart and putting it back together. In 1753 Banneker hand-carved a copy of each gear and made his own clock. It was the first clock made in North America. People came from all over Maryland to see Banneker's clock.
In 1759 Banneker's father died, and responsibility for the family farm passed to Banneker. He made friends with his neighbors, the Ellicott brothers, who built a mill on the property next to his farm. Banneker and one of the brothers shared an interest in astronomy. Astronomy is the study of the sun, the moon, the planets, the stars, and other objects in space. This new friend lent Banneker books on astronomy and instruments for observing the night sky. Banneker built a "work cabin" with a skylight, or window in the roof, and began studying the night sky.
During the day Banneker made calculations about the movement of the stars and planets. Through his calculations he predicted that on April 14, 1789, there would be a solar eclipse. Other scientists said that he was wrong. When the eclipse took place, Banneker became well known as an astronomer. Based on his calculations, he created a table that showed the locations of the sun, the moon, the stars, and the planets at different times of the year.
In 1790 Banneker was asked to help survey the nearby land that later became Washington, D.C. Surveying is the use of mathematics to measure land and create boundaries. Major Pierre-Charles L'Enfant was asked to design the city. After a short time, L'Enfant was fired from the job and left town with the blueprints, or plan, of the city's layout. Luckily, Banneker had seen the plans and was able to redraw the layout of Washington, D.C., in two days. For this, Banneker won the admiration of the new American government.
After returning home, Banneker worked on more calculations based on astronomy. By 1791 he had collected enough information to publish an almanac. Banneker sent a letter and a copy of the almanac to Thomas Jefferson, who was then the United States secretary of state. Banneker's almanac was also given to abolition, or antislavery, societies in Pennsylvania and Maryland. The groups were so impressed by Banneker's work that they paid for the publication of Banneker's Almanac until 1797.
Banneker worked for abolition by writing antislavery pamphlets. He also published a book about bees. Banneker died on his family's farm in Maryland on October 26, 1806.
http://www.harcourtschool.com/activity/biographies/bethune/
QuoteMary McLeod Bethune
Mary McLeod was born on July 10, 1875, in Mayesville, South Carolina. She was the fifteenth of 17 children and the first of the McLeods to be born into freedom instead of slavery.
Through hard work and the charity of others, young Mary McLeod was able to gain a good education. She graduated from the Moody Bible Institute in 1895. Soon she began teaching and working as a missionary. A missionary is a person who teaches his or her religion to others. In 1898 McLeod married Albertus L. Bethune, who was also a teacher.
Mary McLeod Bethune moved to the east coast of Florida in 1904. There she started a school for African American children. She had only $1.50 and a great dream with which to start the school. Bethune's dream was that all children would one day have a chance to get an education. Bethune named her new school the Daytona Normal and Industrial Institute for Negro Girls. She picked through trash to find old lamps, desks, dishes, and other supplies for the school. She also worked tirelessly to get donations from the community to keep the school running. In 1923 Bethune's school merged with the Cookman Institute for Men and became Bethune-Cookman College.
As Bethune continued to improve educational opportunities for African Americans, she became more and more interested in political issues. In 1935 she founded the National Council for Negro Women with the goal of bettering the lives of African American women. That same year Bethune was awarded the Spingarn Medal by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). She was also appointed to the staffs of United States Presidents Calvin Coolidge, Herbert Hoover, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and Harry S. Truman. Bethune advised the Presidents on such issues as child welfare, housing, jobs, and education. Because of her many accomplishments, Bethune became highly respected as a supporter of human rights-the freedoms that all people should have.
QuoteUntil the age of 15, Banneker also attended school, where he did well in science and mathematics. He later outgrew the knowledge of his teacher and began making up his own math problems to solve. During his free time Banneker also taught himself literature, history, and advanced mathematics.
So he wasted a little time. But by and large, he was a good egg. :)
I was gonna post a 1980s Eddie Murphy SNL Black History Minute, but this was all I could find: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5ke0khk8GI
Quote from: Ideologue on February 04, 2014, 10:55:14 PM
QuoteUntil the age of 15, Banneker also attended school, where he did well in science and mathematics. He later outgrew the knowledge of his teacher and began making up his own math problems to solve. During his free time Banneker also taught himself literature, history, and advanced mathematics.
So he wasted a little time. But by and large, he was a good egg. :)
You shouldn't judge him by modern standards.
I found this blog earlier today. I find the website fascinating.... and horribly sad that it doesn't occur to people that there were people of color throughout Western European history.
http://medievalpoc.tumblr.com/
I really like his post about black women in the 16th century.
I can't help but think that actively going out of your way to identify a group of people by their skin colour and establishing a separate identity for that skin-colour group is not what MLK meant when he dreamed of his children being judged by the content of their character.
That should have been thought of prior to slavery and colonialism then :mellow:
Quote from: Sheilbh on February 05, 2014, 07:20:50 AM
That should have been thought of prior to slavery and colonialism then :mellow:
I am sure the people of the 16th century sat down and thought long and hard about how their decisions were going to impact people five hundreds years from now.
Edit: But I find it hard to believe people would not be tribalistic or nationalistic without colonialism and slavery.
Quote from: Viking on February 05, 2014, 07:16:01 AM
I can't help but think that actively going out of your way to identify a group of people by their skin colour and establishing a separate identity for that skin-colour group is not what MLK meant when he dreamed of his children being judged by the content of their character.
I am not sure MLK was the hard core anti-black identity guy you think he was.
Quote from: merithyn on February 05, 2014, 12:44:37 AM
I found this blog earlier today. I find the website fascinating.... and horribly sad that it doesn't occur to people that there were people of color throughout Western European history.
People know basically nothing about Western European History except stereotypes generally. But what exactly do you mean by 'people of color' here? Surely everybody who knows even a little bit realizes there were Arabs and North Africans and all that in Western Europe, they ruled Spain for Godsake.
Edit: Ok looking over the website I think I see the problem. In popular media 'Medieval Europe' tends to mean the insular British Islands rather than say Italy or something. I mean how often does something show up from in popular media about Medieval Germany? However the most popular story that takes place in Medieval France is the Hunchback of Notre Dame which sort of concerns this very issue...I don't know if modern racism is really white washing Medieval history the way this website claims. I mean heck there is a famous rant about Sicilians being descended from Black Africans (granted not in a very fluffy PC way).
Quote from: Valmy on February 05, 2014, 10:21:55 AM
Quote from: Viking on February 05, 2014, 07:16:01 AM
I can't help but think that actively going out of your way to identify a group of people by their skin colour and establishing a separate identity for that skin-colour group is not what MLK meant when he dreamed of his children being judged by the content of their character.
I am not sure MLK was the hard core anti-black identity guy you think he was.
It is probably a silly game to try to assume what dead people would think about modern issues, but I find it hard to believe that MLK would oppose a black history month. Or that he would support right wing causes and oppose affirmative action, as some Republicans seem to think.
Quote from: Valmy on February 05, 2014, 10:23:27 AM
I mean heck there is a famous rant about Sicilians being descended from Black Africans (granted not in a very fluffy PC way).
Only the Lega Nord can go this far. :)
Quote from: Duque de Bragança on February 05, 2014, 11:05:19 AM
Quote from: Valmy on February 05, 2014, 10:23:27 AM
I mean heck there is a famous rant about Sicilians being descended from Black Africans (granted not in a very fluffy PC way).
Only the Lega Nord can go this far. :)
I don't think Dennis Hopper is a member.
Quote from: Valmy on February 05, 2014, 10:21:55 AM
Quote from: Viking on February 05, 2014, 07:16:01 AM
I can't help but think that actively going out of your way to identify a group of people by their skin colour and establishing a separate identity for that skin-colour group is not what MLK meant when he dreamed of his children being judged by the content of their character.
I am not sure MLK was the hard core anti-black identity guy you think he was.
He sure as hell wasn't a pro-black identity guy.
Quote from: Sheilbh on February 05, 2014, 07:20:50 AM
That should have been thought of prior to slavery and colonialism then :mellow:
Well, my relatives were taken into slavery in africa, I want compensation. Plus, my country was subjected to almost 700 years of colonialism from 1262 to 1940.
Quote from: merithyn on February 05, 2014, 12:44:37 AM
I found this blog earlier today. I find the website fascinating.... and horribly sad that it doesn't occur to people that there were people of color throughout Western European history.
http://medievalpoc.tumblr.com/
I really like his post about black women in the 16th century.
One problem with that site is that the author seems to get very heated about comments he receives. Leaves everyone looking a little distasteful.
Quote from: Sheilbh on February 05, 2014, 07:20:50 AM
That should have been thought of prior to slavery and colonialism then :mellow:
That's one of the reason the European powers justified colonising and effectively occupying Africa: ending slavery. As a matter of fact, it greatly decreased except in some predominantly muslim areas e.g Mauritania.
Quote from: Duque de Bragança on February 05, 2014, 01:03:04 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on February 05, 2014, 07:20:50 AM
That should have been thought of prior to slavery and colonialism then :mellow:
That's one of the reason the European powers justified colonising and effectively occupying Africa: ending slavery. As a matter of fact, it greatly decreased except in some predominantly muslim areas e.g Mauritania.
Honey, you're being racist again.
Quote from: merithyn on February 05, 2014, 12:44:37 AM
I found this blog earlier today. I find the website fascinating.... and horribly sad that it doesn't occur to people that there were people of color throughout Western European history.
http://medievalpoc.tumblr.com/
I really like his post about black women in the 16th century.
Horribly sad?
Quote from: merithyn on February 05, 2014, 12:44:37 AM
I found this blog earlier today. I find the website fascinating.... and horribly sad that it doesn't occur to people that there were people of color throughout Western European history.
http://medievalpoc.tumblr.com/
I really like his post about black women in the 16th century.
Honestly, this website is full of shit.
Quote
Portugal (c. 1650s)
Italy/China (1736)
France/Netherlands (1733)
Dutch (1634)
etc.
When do they think the Middle Ages occurred? Of course Europeans knew what Asians and Africans looked like during the age of colonialism.
Quote from: Grinning_Colossus on February 05, 2014, 01:42:44 PM
Quote from: merithyn on February 05, 2014, 12:44:37 AM
I found this blog earlier today. I find the website fascinating.... and horribly sad that it doesn't occur to people that there were people of color throughout Western European history.
http://medievalpoc.tumblr.com/
I really like his post about black women in the 16th century.
Honestly, this website is full of shit.
Quote
Portugal (c. 1650s)
Italy/China (1736)
France/Netherlands (1733)
Dutch (1634)
etc.
When do they think the Middle Ages occurred? Of course Europeans knew what Asians and Africans looked like during the age of colonialism.
:huh:
QuoteMISSION STATEMENT
The focus of this blog is to showcase works of art from European history that feature People of Color. All too often, these works go unseen in museums, Art History classes, online galleries, and other venues because of retroactive whitewashing of Medieval Europe, Scandinavia, and Asia.
Although the focus is toward art dating from the fall of the Roman Empire until about 1650, it will also include Baroque and Early Modern pieces, as well as works from places other than Europe, Scandinavia and Asia. Ancient Greek, Egyptian and Celtic works featuring People of Color are also fair game.
My purpose in creating this blog is to address common misconceptions that People of Color did not exist in Europe before the Enlightenment, and to emphasize the cognitive dissonance in the way this is reflected in media produced today.
The ubiquity in modern media to display a fictitiously all-white Europe is often thoughtlessly and inaccurately justified by claims of "historical accuracy"; this blog is here to emphasize the modern racism that retroactively erases gigantic swaths of truth and beauty.
This blog addresses situations regarding North American and often United States-specific misconceptions and miseducation about history, race, and racism. European history is already misrepresented in American classrooms. This blog is dedicated to providing a counternarrative to dominant social, cultural, and political narratives about European history in relation to both white identity and white supremacy as an institutionalized form of oppression. Those who control our knowledge of history also control our present, and putting resources and knowledge back into the hands of those most affected by the misinformation and misrepresentation codified into the U.S. education system is a large part of the purpose in curating this blog.
A tertiary effect of showcasing these works is to provide a vehicle for correcting assumptions that works of fantasy based in "re-imagined" worlds of Medieval or Renaissance Europe that omit the contributions and presence of People of Color are made with "historical accuracy" in mind. In fact, the opposite is often the case.
Modern media does not exist in a vacuum.
Quote from: The Brain on February 05, 2014, 01:11:40 PM
Quote from: Duque de Bragança on February 05, 2014, 01:03:04 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on February 05, 2014, 07:20:50 AM
That should have been thought of prior to slavery and colonialism then :mellow:
That's one of the reason the European powers justified colonising and effectively occupying Africa: ending slavery. As a matter of fact, it greatly decreased except in some predominantly muslim areas e.g Mauritania.
Honey, you're being racist again.
Nein, Frau Taubira.
Quote from: garbon on February 05, 2014, 01:52:02 PM
The focus of this blog is to showcase works of art from European history that feature People of Color. All too often, these works go unseen in museums, Art History classes, online galleries, and other venues because of retroactive whitewashing of Medieval Europe, Scandinavia, and Asia.
Although the focus is toward art dating from the fall of the Roman Empire until about 1650, it will also include Baroque and Early Modern pieces, as well as works from places other than Europe, Scandinavia and Asia. Ancient Greek, Egyptian and Celtic works featuring People of Color are also fair game.
My purpose in creating this blog is to address common misconceptions that People of Color did not exist in Europe before the Enlightenment, and to emphasize the cognitive dissonance in the way this is reflected in media produced today.
The ubiquity in modern media to display a fictitiously all-white Europe is often thoughtlessly and inaccurately justified by claims of “historical accuracy”; this blog is here to emphasize the modern racism that retroactively erases gigantic swaths of truth and beauty.
This blog addresses situations regarding North American and often United States-specific misconceptions and miseducation about history, race, and racism. European history is already misrepresented in American classrooms. This blog is dedicated to providing a counternarrative to dominant social, cultural, and political narratives about European history in relation to both white identity and white supremacy as an institutionalized form of oppression. Those who control our knowledge of history also control our present, and putting resources and knowledge back into the hands of those most affected by the misinformation and misrepresentation codified into the U.S. education system is a large part of the purpose in curating this blog.
A tertiary effect of showcasing these works is to provide a vehicle for correcting assumptions that works of fantasy based in “re-imagined” worlds of Medieval or Renaissance Europe that omit the contributions and presence of People of Color are made with “historical accuracy” in mind. In fact, the opposite is often the case.
Modern media does not exist in a vacuum.
3/4 of the most recent examples are post-1650, and they're all Enlightenment-era, probably because they can't find many unambiguous PoCs in actual Medieval art.
It's also trying to disprove an assumption that's essentially correct. Aside from the aforementioned Arabs (who were hardly an integrated group in contemporary Christian societies) there really weren't very many people of color in Medieval Western Europe at all. Coptic or Maronite traders might have set in shop at big ports and the occasional Nubian/Ethiopian Christian might have made it through once in a while, but arguing that minorities were a visible part of those societies is nuts.
Heh, I am all for the "retroactive whitewashing" of medieval Scandinavia. :lol:
Joking aside, there certainly were Arab travellers trading in those parts - the very first written account of a Viking funeral was Arab - but they were rarities.
http://www.theroot.com/articles/history/2013/12/blacks_in_western_art_why_one_of_the_wise_men_is_black_in_this_painting.html
of course europeans knew of other skin colours, they even fetished it in their art
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theroot.com%2Fcontent%2Fdam%2Ftheroot%2Fculture%2F2013%2F12%2FHieronymousBosch.AdorationoftheMagi.jpg.CROP.rtstoryvar-large.AdorationoftheMagi.jpg&hash=37c36a9a65634f314587e40d6bf4453e2aeb0918)
traditionally the adoration of the magi scenes had one white maegus for europe, one black one for africa and one yellow one for asia. Even in the far north of scandinavia there was a native understanding that people had different skin. The old word for negro in norse which literally translates to "blue man", meaning they felt the need to come up with a word for it on their own.
Racism doesn't really get institutionalized until the enlightenment when europeans had to try and square their new ideas of human dignity with slavery. The transatlantic slave trade started because indians were of no use in force labour (probably due to new diseases rather than cultural or genetic reasons). Blacks were already the subjects of the arab slave trade and they were tropical, meaning they didn't die like flies on the plantations.
Why does group X succeed better than group Y. It's been the question of our age beginning with the original scientific racists, through anti-semitism to Jared Diamond's Solomon islander who asked why the white man had all the cargo (introduction to guns, germs and steel) and Bernard Lewis' book "What went wrong?" about the arab world's failure in development publish september 9th 2001. This is the driving question behind Group X Studies and multi culturalism.
I know what I think the answer is, Bertrand Russel's observation that people love their bad ideas and often die for them does give the best explanation.
QuoteThis is the driving question behind Group X Studies and multi culturalism.
No, not really. Not at all. :mellow:
Quote from: Viking on February 05, 2014, 10:41:59 PM
Why does group X succeed better than group Y. It's been the question of our age beginning with the original scientific racists, through anti-semitism to Jared Diamond's Solomon islander who asked why the white man had all the cargo (introduction to guns, germs and steel) and Bernard Lewis' book "What went wrong?" about the arab world's failure in development publish september 9th 2001. This is the driving question behind Group X Studies and multi culturalism.
I know what I think the answer is, Bertrand Russel's observation that people love their bad ideas and often die for them does give the best explanation.
Disagree. Europe has "done better" only over the last few centuries, as a result of contingent historical factors - the Europeans of the early 17th century certainly did not think they were "doing better" than the Turks or Chinese (and the Turks and north africans were happily slave-trading in Europeans just as the Europeans were slave-trading in Africans!).
Multi-culturalism has nothing to do with worrying about such issues, but is simply an aknowledgement that societies (or at least, some societies) these days have many cultual roots and not just one.
Quote from: Malthus on February 06, 2014, 10:22:43 AM
Multi-culturalism has nothing to do with worrying about such issues, but is simply an aknowledgement that societies (or at least, some societies) these days have many cultual roots and not just one.
Exactly.
Quote from: Malthus on February 06, 2014, 10:22:43 AM
Quote from: Viking on February 05, 2014, 10:41:59 PM
Why does group X succeed better than group Y. It's been the question of our age beginning with the original scientific racists, through anti-semitism to Jared Diamond's Solomon islander who asked why the white man had all the cargo (introduction to guns, germs and steel) and Bernard Lewis' book "What went wrong?" about the arab world's failure in development publish september 9th 2001. This is the driving question behind Group X Studies and multi culturalism.
I know what I think the answer is, Bertrand Russel's observation that people love their bad ideas and often die for them does give the best explanation.
Disagree. Europe has "done better" only over the last few centuries, as a result of contingent historical factors - the Europeans of the early 17th century certainly did not think they were "doing better" than the Turks or Chinese (and the Turks and north africans were happily slave-trading in Europeans just as the Europeans were slave-trading in Africans!).
Multi-culturalism has nothing to do with worrying about such issues, but is simply an aknowledgement that societies (or at least, some societies) these days have many cultual roots and not just one.
1 - the enlightenment didn't start up til the late 17th century
2 - they were comparing themselves to primarily indians and black africans, though when they did compare themselves to oriental powers they certainly did think they, as individuals, were doing much better
3 - if it were merely an acknowledgement of facts it would require no policies other than education, facts are stubborn things, they don't really require designated months
Multi-Culturalism is precisely about such issues. Race isn't the answer, genetics and biology prove that, location isn't the answer, krea, germany and israel prove that. The answer lies in the culture, habits and institutions of the west. Pretending that non-western habits and institutions are equal or equivalent means you need to go back to race or conspiracy or racism to explain the differences.
I'm sure some of you are thinking, omg raciss!!!!!1111oneoneone right now. An accident of history landed us with the values which built our societies. The Romans conquered the Greeks who invented western philosophy and the jews who invented the idea the idea of the individual with intrinsic value; they in turn were conquered by men who considered themselves first of all free men (the literal meaning of the word Frank). As I said, accident of history. Western societies, even those who didn't colonize nor participate in slavery, have superior outcomes to all non-western societies which don't explicitly mimic western institutions and habits. It's either correlation or causation; in either case adopting the tribal and religious habits and institutions of failed societies is bad and stupid, adopting their music, food and fashion isn't.
By identifying individuals with the culture of their parents and grandparents rather than with the society in which they live you are creating parallel societies which are not cohesive and homogeneous. Black history month is all about us and them, how "we" were mean to "them" and "they" have good reason to feel aggrieved at "us". It's hard for me to conceive of many things which are stupider if you want to create an integrated society where people are actually judged by the content of their character.
Location doesn't matter? That's a dubious assertion.
That was quite the rant, Viking. It may describe what you think multiculturalism is, but it doesn't make it true. Malthus summarized it well. It's about acknowledging, and celebrating, that our society consists of people with roots in many different cultures.
Your theory that Western cultures are inherently better at producing material better outcomes is entirely orthogonal to that.
Finally, your insistence the everyone should be like you, that your particular cultural proclivities should be emulated by all in your state, creates stronger us-vs-them dynamics in society than the letting everyone be themselves within a multicultural framework. Ironically, you insistence on unity creates division, while embracing diversity encourages unity.
Quote from: Jacob on February 06, 2014, 07:45:11 PM
Finally, your insistence the everyone should be like you, that your particular cultural proclivities should be emulated by all in your state, creates stronger us-vs-them dynamics in society than the letting everyone be themselves within a multicultural framework. Ironically, you insistence on unity creates division, while embracing diversity encourages unity.
I don't think it's anywhere near as cut and dried as you seem to think, but that's the experiment we're engaged in now. We know that Viking's approach works in the long term, but we have no idea as to the long-term effects of multiculturalism. It could be that it is just as effective, but I would be extremely surprised if it was more effective. Looking at Canada, it was certainly a mistake not to stamp out the French.
Quote from: Jacob on February 06, 2014, 07:45:11 PM
That was quite the rant, Viking. It may describe what you think multiculturalism is, but it doesn't make it true. Malthus summarized it well. It's about acknowledging, and celebrating, that our society consists of people with roots in many different cultures.
The same applies the other way round. Malthus may describe what he thinks multiculturalism is, but it doesn't make it true. This is a bad piece of logic here. I'm not talking about what the intention is or what the goal is but rather one of the consequences. From just within the danish context I'd like to point out that Nørrebro happens. In denmark Nasser Khader and Yahia Hassan have both made, in effect, the same or part of my case.
It's not just about acknowledging and celebrating that our societies consist of people with roots in many cultures. It is also about treating people not as individuals but as members of groups.
Quote from: Jacob on February 06, 2014, 07:45:11 PM
Your theory that Western cultures are inherently better at producing material better outcomes is entirely orthogonal to that.
Western societies and societies which emulate western habits and institutions do materially produce better outcomes. Whether you list them by City (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercer_Quality_of_Living_Survey) or Country (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Development_Index). Western success here is highly cromulent because the assertion that cultures are equal is the central motivating idea behind multi culturalism. I'm saying they are not equal.
Groups which self-identify out of the mainsteam fail. Groups which integrate cease to be separate groups and become part of the mainstream.
Quote from: Jacob on February 06, 2014, 07:45:11 PM
Finally, your insistence the everyone should be like you, that your particular cultural proclivities should be emulated by all in your state, creates stronger us-vs-them dynamics in society than the letting everyone be themselves within a multicultural framework. Ironically, you insistence on unity creates division, while embracing diversity encourages unity.
Unfortunately all of the paragraph above is in your head. Both in your representation of what I think people should be like and in what the consequences of multiple group identities in societies. Papering over the cracks and obstinately sticking one's head in the sand pretending there aren't problem does lead to conflict.
Telling the rest of society that "we are not like you" while asserting that all modes of living are equal means the only reasonable explanation for a group failing is racism, rather than what they have in common.
A full month devoted to self-mastubatory assertions that we are great and fabulous while the converse is clearly shown in every kind of qualitative and quantitative measure is, well...
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.boredportal.com%2Ffiles%2Fpictures%2FBoredPortal.com_You-win-the-Prize.jpg&hash=95590dd906066f935a8d97b2102d60f69014b26b)
Rather than getting Cornell West and the various Black Studies departments to come in and tell african-americans that it's not their own fault, they should get Bill Cosby to come in and tell african americans that their success is up to themselves.
Whatever historical wrong were done to your ancestors and whatever hardships they suffered and whatever racist bigots say about you, it is still up to yourself to make your own future.
Quote from: Ideologue on February 06, 2014, 07:25:40 PM
Location doesn't matter? That's a dubious assertion.
North Korea - South Korea
Communist China - Republican China
India - Pakistan
Israel - Palestine
East Germany - West Germany
San Diego -Tijuana
El Paso - Ciudad Juarez
Havana - Miami
Cadiz - Tangiers
Palermo - Tunis
Vienna - Bratislava
Helsinki - Tallin
Singapore - Jakarta
Darwin - Makassar
I can keep going...
Viking makes me laugh.
Personally, I think Black History Month is fun because I get to learn all kinds of things that I wouldn't otherwise get to see. Like paintings of black women from Western Europe during the 1500s. :)
Quote from: merithyn on February 06, 2014, 09:20:34 PM
Personally, I think Black History Month is fun because I get to learn all kinds of things that I wouldn't otherwise get to see.
:yes:
That's why I like it as well. It isn't because I have some buy-in into racial groups or superiority of groups or what have you. Really just a time to learn about some various figures in history I would otherwise not learn about.
Of course, Viking seems tone deaf about race in America (despite having lived here), so not surprising that he takes the stance that he does.
Quote from: garbon on February 06, 2014, 09:24:27 PM
Of course, Viking seems tone deaf about race in America (despite having lived here), so not surprising that he takes the stance that he does.
If the worst thing you can say is I'm being rude or strident or insensitive then screw you. If you're not telling me who I'm wrong or how you are right then you aren't being very relevant are you?
I don't feel any form of post-colonial guilt or even responsibility for slavery, oppression, racism, exploitation etc.etc. carried out by people who were not me.
I also don't feel any respect for the idea that because your ancestors were treated poorly that that is a reason to explain your failure or that is something you needed to be compensated for. The various black peoples of the world were being enslaved and colonized my lilly white ancestors were also being enslaved and colonized.
I'm not tone deaf about race (or religion for that matter) I just don't accept the validity of the claim that "you are rude" is an argument. Three generations ago my ancestors were eeking out a living on a resource free shithole of a windswept rock in the middle of but fuck nowhere suffering from zero development and almost 700 years of exploitative colonial rule from denmark and norway.
I never said you were rude or asked you to feel any of those things that you don't feel.
Quote from: Viking on February 06, 2014, 11:45:19 PM
Three generations ago my ancestors were eeking out a living on a resource free shithole of a windswept rock in the middle of but fuck nowhere suffering from zero development and almost 700 years of exploitative colonial rule from denmark and norway.
We'll give them the month of November.
Quote from: garbon on February 06, 2014, 09:23:03 PM
Quote from: merithyn on February 06, 2014, 09:20:34 PM
Personally, I think Black History Month is fun because I get to learn all kinds of things that I wouldn't otherwise get to see.
:yes:
That's why I like it as well. It isn't because I have some buy-in into racial groups or superiority of groups or what have you. Really just a time to learn about some various figures in history I would otherwise not learn about.
Yeah that is what I thought the whole deal was. You just, you know, talk about black history during black history month.
When I was growing up, I learned a very interesting bit of Black history - from a site that is only a couple of miles from my family's cottage (a/k/a cabin ;) ).
As it turns out, the first non-aboriginal settlers in Oro county were Black. The settlement was founded by Black freemen granted land for services during the War of 1812 (and later opened to any Blacks). The idea was essentially defensive: it was naturally assumed by the government that free Blacks would provide loyal soldiers to defend the area in the case of an American attack, given that the Americans were a slave society. So land grants were made to Blacks on an equal basis with Whites, an unusually progressive attitude at the time (if a self-interested one).
Later, the very end of the "Underground Railway" for freed slaves was in Oro ("Oro" from "gold" in Spanish - as in the land of gold, gold at the end of the rainbow, etc.). This is where the slaves who were really worried about cross-border slave-hunters fled.
The Black community built a church there that is still standing - the "African Episcopal Church". It is the oldest log-built African church in north america.
http://www.historicplaces.ca/en/rep-reg/place-lieu.aspx?id=12100&pid=0
Thing is, Oro is relatively shitty as farmland and naturally very very brutal in winter. After the Civil War, the settlement there gradually died out as most of the Black settlers moved to more clement climes: the last one died in the 1940s. The community (now mostly White) rallied to preserve the Church, though.
Yeah, Diversity does all kinds of wondrous things that for some reason just can't be quantified, gosh-darnit.
I watched Roots and that very special episode of Mash with the cracker not wanting black blood.
Quote from: derspiess on February 07, 2014, 11:05:42 AM
Yeah, Diversity does all kinds of wondrous things that for some reason just can't be quantified, gosh-darnit.
The anti-groupthink.
Quote from: derspiess on February 07, 2014, 11:05:42 AM
Yeah, Diversity does all kinds of wondrous things that for some reason just can't be quantified, gosh-darnit.
Like any other quality of life thing.
Living in an ethnically-diverse city is simply
more interesting than living in a monoethnic city.
Quote from: Malthus on February 07, 2014, 11:09:08 AM
Quote from: derspiess on February 07, 2014, 11:05:42 AM
Yeah, Diversity does all kinds of wondrous things that for some reason just can't be quantified, gosh-darnit.
Like any other quality of life thing.
Living in an ethnically-diverse city is simply more interesting than living in a monoethnic city.
Also better restaurants.
Quote from: Razgovory on February 07, 2014, 11:10:26 AM
Quote from: Malthus on February 07, 2014, 11:09:08 AM
Quote from: derspiess on February 07, 2014, 11:05:42 AM
Yeah, Diversity does all kinds of wondrous things that for some reason just can't be quantified, gosh-darnit.
Like any other quality of life thing.
Living in an ethnically-diverse city is simply more interesting than living in a monoethnic city.
Also better restaurants.
One of the main ways in which ethnically-diverse places are more interesting - that, and a variety in female eye-candy (or male, if one's tastes run in that direction) . ;)
Quote from: Malthus on February 07, 2014, 11:13:13 AM
(or male, if one's tastes run in that direction)
Rude!
Quote from: Jacob on February 06, 2014, 07:45:11 PM
Finally, your insistence the everyone should be like you, that your particular cultural proclivities should be emulated by all in your state, creates stronger us-vs-them dynamics in society than the letting everyone be themselves within a multicultural framework. Ironically, you insistence on unity creates division, while embracing diversity encourages unity.
Ironically, you are pursuing an exclusive definition of multiculturalism (that dismisses Viking's use by claiming that "Multi-culturalism has nothing to do with worrying about.... issues [such as Viking raises]") which is contrary to what most people think of as a basic tenet of multiculturalism: the idea that many different ideas all have value.
And it is interesting that Viking, in posing a question, is read by you as "insist[ing] that everyone should be like [him]." That's quite the intolerant, mono-cultural approach! :lol:
Quote from: garbon on February 06, 2014, 09:24:27 PM
Of course, Viking seems tone deaf about race in America (despite having lived here), so not surprising that he takes the stance that he does.
You get a Gold Medal in the Ad Hom Competition. :cool:
Quote from: grumbler on February 07, 2014, 11:22:34 AM
Quote from: garbon on February 06, 2014, 09:24:27 PM
Of course, Viking seems tone deaf about race in America (despite having lived here), so not surprising that he takes the stance that he does.
You get a Gold Medal in the Ad Hom Competition. :cool:
Except it was accurate and relevant to Viking's contentions about race and how we should all just get over it. :)
If we banned the words "Ad" and "Straw" I think that Grumbler's posting output we be down by about half.
Quote from: Malthus on February 07, 2014, 11:09:08 AM
Like any other quality of life thing.
Living in an ethnically-diverse city is simply more interesting than living in a monoethnic city.
Well, that, and things like the Renaissance and Scientific Revolution, both of which were founded on knowledge newly gained from "others." People from different backgrounds will think of different solutions to the same problem. Sometimes, the solutions from 'them" will be better than anything one of "us" would ever have thought of.
Quote from: garbon on February 07, 2014, 11:26:09 AM
Quote from: grumbler on February 07, 2014, 11:22:34 AM
Quote from: garbon on February 06, 2014, 09:24:27 PM
Of course, Viking seems tone deaf about race in America (despite having lived here), so not surprising that he takes the stance that he does.
You get a Gold Medal in the Ad Hom Competition. :cool:
Except it was accurate and relevant to Viking's contentions about race and how we should all just get over it. :)
Except that it was an argument aimed at the man rather than the argument, and thus not responsive to his point at all.
I just call them as I see them. If you can't tell the difference between an ad hom and an intellectual argument, go to http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ (http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/) and read up.
Quote from: grumbler on February 07, 2014, 11:18:40 AM
Quote from: Jacob on February 06, 2014, 07:45:11 PM
Finally, your insistence the everyone should be like you, that your particular cultural proclivities should be emulated by all in your state, creates stronger us-vs-them dynamics in society than the letting everyone be themselves within a multicultural framework. Ironically, you insistence on unity creates division, while embracing diversity encourages unity.
Ironically, you are pursuing an exclusive definition of multiculturalism (that dismisses Viking's use by claiming that "Multi-culturalism has nothing to do with worrying about.... issues [such as Viking raises]") which is contrary to what most people think of as a basic tenet of multiculturalism: the idea that many different ideas all have value.
And it is interesting that Viking, in posing a question, is read by you as "insist[ing] that everyone should be like [him]." That's quite the intolerant, mono-cultural approach! :lol:
I dunno what "most people think". In my view, the central tenant of multi-culturalism is respect for people of other cultures, not imposing one's own cultural norms upon them - not a value-judgment about their ideas.
In short, if I was pursuing multicultural policies, I can think that their ideas suck,
say that they suck, but defend their right to express them (within the law) - something akin to the US official approach to religion or speech, but extended to matters cultural other than religion.
Quote from: grumbler on February 07, 2014, 11:30:08 AM
Quote from: garbon on February 07, 2014, 11:26:09 AM
Quote from: grumbler on February 07, 2014, 11:22:34 AM
Quote from: garbon on February 06, 2014, 09:24:27 PM
Of course, Viking seems tone deaf about race in America (despite having lived here), so not surprising that he takes the stance that he does.
You get a Gold Medal in the Ad Hom Competition. :cool:
Except it was accurate and relevant to Viking's contentions about race and how we should all just get over it. :)
Except that it was an argument aimed at the man rather than the argument, and thus not responsive to his point at all.
I just call them as I see them. If you can't tell the difference between an ad hom and an intellectual argument, go to http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ (http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/) and read up.
I wasn't interested in responding to his "argument" so you can totally have that point. :)
At any rate, g, I'd rather you cast your withering gaze elsewhere.
Quote from: Razgovory on February 07, 2014, 11:26:36 AM
If we banned the words "Ad" and "Straw" I think that Grumbler's posting output we be down by about half.
If we banned Grumbler and Yi, your posting output would probably be taken down more than half.
Quote from: Malthus on February 07, 2014, 11:33:46 AM
I dunno what "most people think". In my view, the central tenant of multi-culturalism is respect for people of other cultures, not imposing one's own cultural norms upon them - not a value-judgment about their ideas.
You earlier argued that multiculturalism had "nothing to do" with a comparison of the outcomes in material production of various societies/cultures. There is no "value judgement" to comparing per capita GDPs, except the value judgement of which measurement of GDP to use.
QuoteIn short, if I was pursuing multicultural policies, I can think that their ideas suck, say that they suck, but defend their right to express them (within the law) - something akin to the US official approach to religion or speech, but extended to matters cultural other than religion.
This is tangential to Viking's point (which I don't completely agree with, btw). He was saying that guys like Diamond are engaged in a type of multicultural studies, and you are (apparently) arguing that Diamond et al were not. In this case, I think Viking is correct.
Quote from: garbon on February 07, 2014, 11:34:10 AM
I wasn't interested in responding to his "argument" so you can totally have that point. :)
Okay.
Quote from: garbon on February 07, 2014, 11:35:41 AM
At any rate, g, I'd rather you cast your withering gaze elsewhere.
You are free to leave. If you reserve the right to read and post, however, I'd rather that you not tell me where you want me to read or post.
Quote from: grumbler on February 07, 2014, 02:05:58 PM
Quote from: garbon on February 07, 2014, 11:35:41 AM
At any rate, g, I'd rather you cast your withering gaze elsewhere.
You are free to leave. If you reserve the right to read and post, however, I'd rather that you not tell me where you want me to read or post.
And I'd rather you didn't reply to me. :)
Quote from: grumbler on February 07, 2014, 02:05:58 PM
Quote from: garbon on February 07, 2014, 11:35:41 AM
At any rate, g, I'd rather you cast your withering gaze elsewhere.
You are free to leave. If you reserve the right to read and post, however, I'd rather that you not tell me where you want me to read or post.
garbon is free to tell you what he wants you to read or post.
Quote from: grumbler on February 07, 2014, 02:03:41 PM
You earlier argued that multiculturalism had "nothing to do" with a comparison of the outcomes in material production of various societies/cultures. There is no "value judgement" to comparing per capita GDPs, except the value judgement of which measurement of GDP to use.
Huh?
"Multiculturalism" has nothing to do with comparative GDPs.
QuoteThis is tangential to Viking's point (which I don't completely agree with, btw). He was saying that guys like Diamond are engaged in a type of multicultural studies, and you are (apparently) arguing that Diamond et al were not. In this case, I think Viking is correct.
What are "multicultural studies"? Are you conflating "multiculturalism" with "cultural relativism"? The two are not the same thing.
I'm talking about actual multicultualism - that is, its use in policy-making, within our society. I really have no idea of what use you are making of the term.
As in: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-18.7/page-1.html
Or: http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/10/24/multiculturalism-in-its-controversial-glory-is-canada-a-country-without-a-core-culture/
I cast my withering gaze at Tim.
He still hasn't melted yet
Quote from: Ed Anger on February 07, 2014, 02:49:17 PM
I cast my withering gaze at Tim.
He still hasn't melted yet
Duh, he's withered. Try your melting gaze.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on February 07, 2014, 03:42:41 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on February 07, 2014, 02:49:17 PM
I cast my withering gaze at Tim.
He still hasn't melted yet
Duh, he's withered. Try your melting gaze.
"Casting a melting gaze" at someone sounds like something the heroine from a 19th century romance would do. :lol:
Quote from: Malthus on February 07, 2014, 03:45:24 PM
"Casting a melting gaze" at someone sounds like something the heroine from a 19th century romance would do. :lol:
It certainly ripped my bodice.
Our Boner is a complex person.
Quote from: Ed Anger on February 07, 2014, 02:49:17 PM
I cast my withering gaze at Tim.
He still hasn't melted yet
You melted his heart. :wub:
You know, both Viking and Jacob can be right: Western civilization can be the best civilization in human history, and it can be evil and must be destroyed. :)
Anything that pisses off feminazis is OK in my book.
I also like the little crown of snow.
Wrong thread. :D
:weep:
You want the Cisgendered History Month thread.
Stop rubbing it in. :glare:
But we're in a post-cisgendered world now.
Sorry if I triggered you. :console:
Quote from: CountDeMoney on February 07, 2014, 07:47:16 PM
But we're in a post-cisgendered world now.
Yeah, I wish. You need straight-up Bond levels of masculinity these days.
Genderfluid
I know where I like to put my genderfluid.
Have to read the fine print: pretty sure synthetic violates the warranty.
Quote from: Ideologue on February 07, 2014, 08:22:52 PM
I know where I like to put my genderfluid.
http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/gossip/eddie-murphy-daughters-pose-lingerie-shoot-article-1.1604365
? (NSFW)
Quote from: Jacob on February 07, 2014, 02:07:50 PM
garbon is free to tell you what he wants you to read or post.
And I am free to tell him that I'd rather he didn't. :cool:
Quote from: garbon on February 07, 2014, 02:06:48 PM
And I'd rather you didn't reply to me. :)
And I'd rather be sunning myself on a beach in Hawaii. We don't always get what we'd rather. :)
Quote from: The Brain on February 05, 2014, 01:48:18 AM
I don't see black.
They live in different neighborhoods than you do.
http://news.yahoo.com/trader-joe-39-drops-black-neighborhood-store-plan-224732374.html
Well, I do seem to recall that there weren't many black people to be seen when I was in Portland.
Even if they went into that location, they'd pull out in 2 years anyway. Dropping a Trader Joe's into the middle of a low-income 'hood doesn't sound like a big moneymaker, no matter how many hipsters they're trying to get to move into the ghetto to raise the tax base.
I bet derweiß rolled his big ol' creepy ass cracker eyeballs at "non-oppressed populations", though.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on February 08, 2014, 06:32:53 PM
Even if they went into that location, they'd pull out in 2 years anyway. Dropping a Trader Joe's into the middle of a low-income 'hood doesn't sound like a big moneymaker, no matter how many hipsters they're trying to get to move into the ghetto to raise the tax base.
I bet derweiß rolled his big ol' creepy ass cracker eyeballs at "non-oppressed populations", though.
Knowing little of the area, I'm actually wondering though if the people of that neighborhood aren't already being priced out.
Quote from: garbon on February 08, 2014, 06:37:19 PM
Knowing little of the area, I'm actually wondering though if the people of that neighborhood aren't already being priced out.
From Whiteypedia:
QuoteAlberta Street has always been one of the main hubs of the Northeast area in Portland. The street was once the essence of the culture contained by the primarily urban and African-American community. Since the gentrification in the Northeast area, Alberta Street is the heart of an arts, restaurant, and shopping district approximately 20 blocks long. The area around Alberta is becoming very popular with yuppies as well as hipsters, bohemians, hippies and other groups associated with the counterculture.
So they're at least working on it.
:)
Quote from: CountDeMoney on February 08, 2014, 06:45:20 PM
The street was once the essence of the culture contained by the primarily urban and African-American community.
What?
Quote from: derspiess on February 08, 2014, 06:49:44 PM
:)
QuoteOnce the heart of Portland's African-African community, Northeast Portland is now actually only one-fourth black, down from 75 percent in 1990. According to reports, blacks represent only about 6 percent of the city's total population, numbering some 41,000 people. Thousands of African-Americans arrived in Portland during World War II to work in shipyards and the railroads. Also, according to PortlandPulse.org, unemployment among the city's black population has generally run twice as high as rates for whites and Asians.
They should move all the displaced black people in with you, then. I'm sure you've got the room. And, as an added bonus, you can ask Mr. Brown for some employment opportunities for them, what with his record of minority hires. :lol: :P :yeah:
Quote from: Admiral Yi on February 08, 2014, 06:52:11 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on February 08, 2014, 06:45:20 PM
The street was once the essence of the culture contained by the primarily urban and African-American community.
What?
Once upon a time, here there be blacks.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on February 08, 2014, 06:53:59 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on February 08, 2014, 06:52:11 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on February 08, 2014, 06:45:20 PM
The street was once the essence of the culture contained by the primarily urban and African-American community.
What?
Once upon a time, here there be blacks.
I got what the writer was trying to say, just confused as to why he chose this way to say it. "The culture contained by the community??"
Quote from: CountDeMoney on February 08, 2014, 06:53:07 PM
Quote from: derspiess on February 08, 2014, 06:49:44 PM
:)
QuoteOnce the heart of Portland's African-African community, Northeast Portland is now actually only one-fourth black, down from 75 percent in 1990. According to reports, blacks represent only about 6 percent of the city's total population, numbering some 41,000 people. Thousands of African-Americans arrived in Portland during World War II to work in shipyards and the railroads. Also, according to PortlandPulse.org, unemployment among the city's black population has generally run twice as high as rates for whites and Asians.
They should move all the displaced black people in with you, then. I'm sure you've got the room. And, as an added bonus, you can ask Mr. Brown for some employment opportunities for them, what with his record of minority hires. :lol: :P :yeah:
They'd be more comfortable on Cincy's west side, which is more "vibrant" than my part of town.
Quote from: Malthus on February 07, 2014, 02:43:26 PM
Quote from: grumbler on February 07, 2014, 02:03:41 PM
You earlier argued that multiculturalism had "nothing to do" with a comparison of the outcomes in material production of various societies/cultures. There is no "value judgement" to comparing per capita GDPs, except the value judgement of which measurement of GDP to use.
Huh?
"Multiculturalism" has nothing to do with comparative GDPs.
Actually it does. You will note that I always included references to institutions and habits when referring to culture. What your relationship to other people in society, what institutions you participate in and how you participate in are culture too. These things have everything to do with GDP. GDP is a measure of the resources available to a society, not just individuals. It turns out that this is very culture dependent.
Quote from: Malthus on February 07, 2014, 02:43:26 PM
QuoteThis is tangential to Viking's point (which I don't completely agree with, btw). He was saying that guys like Diamond are engaged in a type of multicultural studies, and you are (apparently) arguing that Diamond et al were not. In this case, I think Viking is correct.
What are "multicultural studies"? Are you conflating "multiculturalism" with "cultural relativism"? The two are not the same thing.
I'm talking about actual multicultualism - that is, its use in policy-making, within our society. I really have no idea of what use you are making of the term.
As in: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-18.7/page-1.html
Or: http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/10/24/multiculturalism-in-its-controversial-glory-is-canada-a-country-without-a-core-culture/
here you are confusing culture with race, and suggesting the silly idea that your race determines which habits you cultivate, which instutions you participate in and how you treat people and society around you.
Can Shariah Juristpruedence or Confusian Patriarchy or an Indian Caste Structure make any beneficial contribution to Western (for the lack of a better word) culture? I say no. Can they improve our society, I say no. The migration rate between western societies and islamic, confusian and hindu societies suggests that anybody who has to stake his or her future on the proposition agrees with me.
The ideas that man belongs to god, that father (and the president) know best and you were born to be a fish monger (or whatever) do not deserve respect or even the pretense of respect.
I say let them bring their cuisine, music, games, poetry, art and genetics with them. Our societies will be all the better for them. However the central ideas which we base our western society on, that man is an individual and can choose his purpose in life, that the common facts we use to decide on the choices our society makes are the material facts discoverable by investigation, that the law applies to all people equally and that sovereignty lies with the people, are not to be treated as one among many. This is the bedrock that our societies rest on.
Divided societies never produce equal outcomes, period. Different means Divided, Divided means Separate and Separate certainly doesn't mean equal.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GeixtYS-P3s
Morgan Freeman saying it better than I can, "black history is american history"
He's making the opposite point to you though :mellow:
Quote from: Sheilbh on February 09, 2014, 10:47:47 AM
He's making the opposite point to you though :mellow:
If that's what you think then you fail at reading comprehension. He goes on to object to being considered a member of a separate group. He's an individual and an american in his own eyes.
... however, just as a matter of curiosity, could you in your own words formulate the point you think I'm making?
Basically that multiple narratives are bad and divisive. Roughly.
Quote from: Sheilbh on February 09, 2014, 11:04:22 AM
Basically that multiple narratives are bad and divisive. Roughly.
And what is the opposite point Morgan Freeman makes?
That the narrative's already plural. 'You're going to relegate my history to a month. What do you do with yours?' Also, as you point out, 'black history is American history'. So is Jewish, Italian, Irish, Polish and all the rest. If anything I'd argue that African-Americans, with the Scots-Ulster/Appalachia/'American'-Americans are the most American.
Setting aside time to learn about one that was ignored for bad reasons isn't dividing a single story into many. The diversity is built in. There are lots of stories already.
But basically I think there's a difference between the point you're making, which to me seems the worst kind of grand narrative-building nonsense, and had you come in and said 'but guys black history is American history. We should be celebrating it all the year round!' :P
Quote from: Viking on February 09, 2014, 03:39:37 AM
Can Shariah Juristpruedence or Confusian Patriarchy or an Indian Caste Structure make any beneficial contribution to Western (for the lack of a better word) culture? I say no. Can they improve our society, I say no. The migration rate between western societies and islamic, confusian and hindu societies suggests that anybody who has to stake his or her future on the proposition agrees with me.
No, all of those things are horrible, but they luckily break down pretty quickly outside of their original societal contexts -- both because they lack the support to be tenable outside of insular 1st and 2nd generation immigrant communities and because Enlightenment rationalism has the property of eroding irrational cultural constructs. It happened along time ago in the West and it's happening at varying speeds in the rest of the world. Multiculturalism is a stalking horse for long-term integration, since by mollifying the most reactionary and intransigent members of minority communities (who often happen to be respected elders) it keeps them from engaging in too much separatist rhetoric, which makes it easier for 2nd and 3rd generation immigrants to become exposed to the majority culture, which helps them realize that some parts of their own culture are silly and which leads to their integrating and and intermarrying with other groups. I agree that indulging lunatics in things like Sharia' Law in the name of multiculturalism is going too far, though.
Quote from: Sheilbh on February 09, 2014, 11:37:04 AM
That the narrative's already plural. 'You're going to relegate my history to a month. What do you do with yours?' Also, as you point out, 'black history is American history'. So is Jewish, Italian, Irish, Polish and all the rest. If anything I'd argue that African-Americans, with the Scots-Ulster/Appalachia/'American'-Americans are the most American.
:wacko:
He's ridiculing the idea of separate minority history months. Be they scotch-irish or jewish or whatever. He doesn't want any history months, not black not anything else. He goes on to suggest that not talking about it and treating people as individuals as a solution to racism (I agree with the second half, the treating people as individuals bit, but not the former).
Quote from: Sheilbh on February 09, 2014, 11:37:04 AM
Setting aside time to learn about one that was ignored for bad reasons isn't dividing a single story into many. The diversity is built in. There are lots of stories already.
But basically I think there's a difference between the point you're making, which to me seems the worst kind of grand narrative-building nonsense, and had you come in and said 'but guys black history is American history. We should be celebrating it all the year round!' :P
All the bits of what usually is included in black history month is part of american history and should be treated as such. The very act of setting a side a special month for blacks not only encourages the establishment of a parallel identity in conflict with the rest of society it also relegates the contributions of african-americans to american history as a topic of special interest which can safely be ignored the rest of the year.
Anyways, I'm not gonna bother with you on this topic anymore since your obviously not talking to me but rather presenting us with your half of a conversation with a straw-man in your head.
Quote from: Grinning_Colossus on February 09, 2014, 11:48:49 AM
Quote from: Viking on February 09, 2014, 03:39:37 AM
Can Shariah Juristpruedence or Confusian Patriarchy or an Indian Caste Structure make any beneficial contribution to Western (for the lack of a better word) culture? I say no. Can they improve our society, I say no. The migration rate between western societies and islamic, confusian and hindu societies suggests that anybody who has to stake his or her future on the proposition agrees with me.
No, all of those things are horrible, but they luckily break down pretty quickly outside of their original societal contexts -- both because they lack the support to be tenable outside of insular 1st and 2nd generation immigrant communities and because Enlightenment rationalism has the property of eroding irrational cultural constructs. It happened along time ago in the West and it's happening at varying speeds in the rest of the world. Multiculturalism is a stalking horse for long-term integration, since by mollifying the most reactionary and intransigent members of minority communities (who often happen to be respected elders) it keeps them from engaging in too much separatist rhetoric, which makes it easier for 2nd and 3rd generation immigrants to integrate and intermarry with other groups. I agree that indulging lunatics in things like Sharia' Law in the name of multiculturalism is going too far, though.
Mollifying them also validates their concerns and gives credence to their narratives. Especially in the case of european muslims the integration levels among the groups falls over the generations. They are getting less and less integrated over time, not more. You can see this by rates of intermarriage (Especially when compared to other non-wesetern immigrant groups), work force participation, rates of incarceration etc.etc.
When the separate identity is validated it continues and prevents integration. Thats how the jews managed to survive as a people for almost 2 thousand years living among other peoples, they kept their separate identity throughout.
Black people were uniquely subjected to a lot of abuse throughout American history, so they get a history month that most people forget about and that forces the History channel to dig up a documentary on the Underground Railroad and some other stations to maybe play Roots. Does it make black people feel more included? Does it reinforce exclusionary racial identities? Neither, because it's not a big enough deal to affect anyone.
Quote from: Viking on February 09, 2014, 11:57:54 AM
Quote from: Grinning_Colossus on February 09, 2014, 11:48:49 AM
Quote from: Viking on February 09, 2014, 03:39:37 AM
Can Shariah Juristpruedence or Confusian Patriarchy or an Indian Caste Structure make any beneficial contribution to Western (for the lack of a better word) culture? I say no. Can they improve our society, I say no. The migration rate between western societies and islamic, confusian and hindu societies suggests that anybody who has to stake his or her future on the proposition agrees with me.
No, all of those things are horrible, but they luckily break down pretty quickly outside of their original societal contexts -- both because they lack the support to be tenable outside of insular 1st and 2nd generation immigrant communities and because Enlightenment rationalism has the property of eroding irrational cultural constructs. It happened along time ago in the West and it's happening at varying speeds in the rest of the world. Multiculturalism is a stalking horse for long-term integration, since by mollifying the most reactionary and intransigent members of minority communities (who often happen to be respected elders) it keeps them from engaging in too much separatist rhetoric, which makes it easier for 2nd and 3rd generation immigrants to integrate and intermarry with other groups. I agree that indulging lunatics in things like Sharia' Law in the name of multiculturalism is going too far, though.
Mollifying them also validates their concerns and gives credence to their narratives. Especially in the case of european muslims the integration levels among the groups falls over the generations. They are getting less and less integrated over time, not more. You can see this by rates of intermarriage (Especially when compared to other non-wesetern immigrant groups), work force participation, rates of incarceration etc.etc.
When the separate identity is validated it continues and prevents integration. Thats how the jews managed to survive as a people for almost 2 thousand years living among other peoples, they kept their separate identity throughout.
For most of that period Jews who wanted to integrate had to take the plunge and become Christians, which would have cut them off from their friends and family. As religion lost importance Jews in Western and Central Europe started integrating in very large numbers before the Holocaust. There might be something specifically wrong with the Muslim immigrant experience in Europe, or it might just be too early to tell. They're integrating fine in America.
Quote from: Grinning_Colossus on February 09, 2014, 12:02:06 PM
Does it make black people feel more included? Does it reinforce exclusionary racial identities? Neither, because it's not a big enough deal to affect anyone.
:yes:
Quote from: Viking on February 09, 2014, 11:50:22 AMHe's ridiculing the idea of separate minority history months. Be they scotch-irish or jewish or whatever. He doesn't want any history months, not black not anything else. He goes on to suggest that not talking about it and treating people as individuals as a solution to racism (I agree with the second half, the treating people as individuals bit, but not the former).
Yeah. But he's saying that in the context of 'don't relegate my history'. What he's not saying is that we should go back to grand narrative history - whether it's liberal, Whiggish, sonderweg, Marxist or whatever else. He's also not saying we should go back to history which, due to bigotry, isn't the full story. So we shouldn't go back to a version of history that is solely about Europe and European and similarly we shouldn't deny or skate over the impact of minority groups within our own history (and, in fact, we should talk about it because the reasons they were denied are a part of our history). The classic example there is Alan Turing.
I agree with the sentiment that black or gay history shouldn't be split off for just one month - like puppies, they're forever. But I think first we have to get to the point where they are part of our general history and I don't think we're there yet.
Having said all that Freeman is an actor, so what he says on this doesn't really matter any more than Benedict Cumberbatch's opinion on Wikileaks matters. Also the interviewers point that you have black history month to combat racism is absurd. That's putting a lot of weight on a rather slender reed. You have black history month to improve general historical knowledge.
QuoteAll the bits of what usually is included in black history month is part of american history and should be treated as such. The very act of setting a side a special month for blacks not only encourages the establishment of a parallel identity in conflict with the rest of society
But America is made up of parallel identities. Hell, most people are made up of parallel identities. America is the country of Whitman. It doesn't mean there's conflict or that it's exclusionary. It's what identity is in America and I think increasingly globally.
Black history month is now more exclusionary than St. Paddy's Day and I'd go further that I think 'black' is, like 'queer' and 'white', quite an open word. And of course if it was just for black people to celebrate and learn about their history that wouldn't be so good but it's an invitation for everyone to get involved.
I always find myself agreeing more and more with Blair's view that politics now isn't about left-right but open-closed. On this sort of thing I think America, Canada, increasingly the UK and other countries with a similar attitude are more open and that will help them and is the right choice. I don't think the idea of closing ourselves off in this need to have a homogenous coherent culture is a good thing, or would work.
Quoteit also relegates the contributions of african-americans to american history as a topic of special interest which can safely be ignored the rest of the year.
I agree in theory. The problem is that's not the world we came from. We didn't previously study African-American history within the broad context of American history. We just didn't really study African-American history. So I think a corrective is justified.
QuoteAs religion lost importance Jews in Western and Central Europe started integrating in very large numbers before the Holocaust. There might be something specifically wrong with the Muslim immigrant experience in Europe, or it might just be too early to tell. They're integrating fine in America.
I'd add there are degrees of integration involved here.
I think the difference in Europe is largely the fault of Europeans. Right now a new trend in the UK is receiving EU migrants who are second generation immigrants. They're not just Muslim, though German-Turks and French-Algerians are moving here there's also Dutch-Ghanians, but they're moving here because they think the UK is less racist and there are more opportunities here. Again I think it's an open-closed society thing.
One interesting strand of stats on integration is mixed ethnicity marriages and children. In the UK now we're at about the same rate as the US though we have far smaller minority groups. People of Pakistani and Bangladeshi are less likely to marry another ethnicity than other groups, though about 10% do. But it is accelerating and younger generations do it far more and mix with other groups far more. So if there's a difference with Muslim migration and integration I think it may be more to do with pace than anything else. One thing that's no doubt helping is that increasingly London state schools are the best in the country and educational achievement for all groups, but particularly ethnic minorities, in London is increasing hugely.
QuoteBlack people were uniquely subjected to a lot of abuse throughout American history, so they get a history month that most people forget about and that forces the History channel to dig up a documentary on the Underground Railroad and some other stations to maybe play Roots.
Yeah. Which is another point. It seems a bit rich to moan about black history month for talking about one history based on racial identity when the entire reason there's a different history for that groups is their racial identity.
Quote from: Viking on February 09, 2014, 03:39:37 AM
Actually it does. You will note that I always included references to institutions and habits when referring to culture. What your relationship to other people in society, what institutions you participate in and how you participate in are culture too. These things have everything to do with GDP. GDP is a measure of the resources available to a society, not just individuals. It turns out that this is very culture dependent.
That may or may not be true, but it has nothing to do with "multiculturalism".
Mukticulturalism is a set of policies concerning respect for the cultures of others (within the laws), whether or not those cultures are condusive to a greater GDP.
Quotehere you are confusing culture with race, and suggesting the silly idea that your race determines which habits you cultivate, which instutions you participate in and how you treat people and society around you.
How, when I have never even once mentioned race?
Quote
Can Shariah Juristpruedence or Confusian Patriarchy or an Indian Caste Structure make any beneficial contribution to Western (for the lack of a better word) culture? I say no. Can they improve our society, I say no. The migration rate between western societies and islamic, confusian and hindu societies suggests that anybody who has to stake his or her future on the proposition agrees with me.
The ideas that man belongs to god, that father (and the president) know best and you were born to be a fish monger (or whatever) do not deserve respect or even the pretense of respect.
I say let them bring their cuisine, music, games, poetry, art and genetics with them. Our societies will be all the better for them. However the central ideas which we base our western society on, that man is an individual and can choose his purpose in life, that the common facts we use to decide on the choices our society makes are the material facts discoverable by investigation, that the law applies to all people equally and that sovereignty lies with the people, are not to be treated as one among many. This is the bedrock that our societies rest on.
Divided societies never produce equal outcomes, period. Different means Divided, Divided means Separate and Separate certainly doesn't mean equal.
You say "no" to aspects of other people's cultures you don't like, or think are unproductive. That's great. Thing is, even if you are right, why should your opinion overrule that of the people who wish to abide by Chinese, Hindu or Islamic norms - assuming they keep within our laws? If you are right, we are all destined to a more of less unified culture anyway, by operation of free choice.
The issue addressed by multicultural policies is whether your opinion, or those of the European-based majority you represent, ought to have legal significance - above and beyond the basic rights already enshrined in the law - that "bedrock" you speak of. How on Earth can you at one and the same time mouth respect for people to choose their own path in life, and yet wish to legally disadvantage people who choose a path not to your liking because it fails some test you set for utilitarian benefit? If utilitarianism is your test for what is worthy, then at least have the courage of your convictions and admit you don't really respect people's rights to choose - when they make choices you dislike.
http://ideas.time.com/2014/02/28/spike-lees-racism-isnt-cute-m-f-hipster-is-the-new-honkey/
Quote from: derspiess on February 28, 2014, 11:38:09 AM
http://ideas.time.com/2014/02/28/spike-lees-racism-isnt-cute-m-f-hipster-is-the-new-honkey/
There was always going to be a price to be paid for integration. The long term impact is going to be a death, or at least a dramatic shift, in a distinctive black culture in the US (of course, the same can be said for 'white culture' in the old segregation era sense). It is going to take several generations but people like Lee who have the conservatism of old age are not going to be liking it.
Quote from: derspiess on February 28, 2014, 11:38:09 AM
http://ideas.time.com/2014/02/28/spike-lees-racism-isnt-cute-m-f-hipster-is-the-new-honkey/
http://ideas.languish.org/2014/02/28/Derspiess-Bitches-About-Black-History-Month-Like-Typical-White-Redneck-Fuckstick-Wonders-Why-White-People-Don't-Get-A-Month-Too
Quote from: Valmy on February 28, 2014, 11:48:33 AM
There was always going to be a price to be paid for integration. The long term impact is going to be a death, or at least a dramatic shift, in a distinctive black culture in the US (of course, the same can be said for 'white culture' in the old segregation era sense). It is going to take several generations but people like Lee who have the conservatism of old age are not going to be liking it.
We should take their music, and make it our own.
It's nearly over till next year. :weep:
:console:
FWIW, it was a very nice month.
Only for a few hours for garbon to be black. I hoped he lived it up.
Quote from: Razgovory on February 28, 2014, 11:42:03 PM
Only for a few hours for garbon to be black. I hoped he lived it up.
How would you suggest one does that?
Seedy surely has some suggestions.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on February 28, 2014, 10:57:50 PM
Quote from: derspiess on February 28, 2014, 11:38:09 AM
http://ideas.time.com/2014/02/28/spike-lees-racism-isnt-cute-m-f-hipster-is-the-new-honkey/
http://ideas.languish.org/2014/02/28/Derspiess-Bitches-About-Black-History-Month-Like-Typical-White-Redneck-Fuckstick-Wonders-Why-White-People-Don't-Get-A-Month-Too
I clicked on that link but got a 404 Error :(
Quote from: Ed Anger on February 07, 2014, 02:49:17 PM
I cast my withering gaze at Tim.
He still hasn't melted yet
My right leg withered. :weep:
Quote from: Valmy on February 28, 2014, 11:48:33 AM
There was always going to be a price to be paid for integration. The long term impact is going to be a death, or at least a dramatic shift, in a distinctive black culture in the US (of course, the same can be said for 'white culture' in the old segregation era sense). It is going to take several generations but people like Lee who have the conservatism of old age are not going to be liking it.
It's something the gays have had to deal with. It turns out they're overwhelmingly conservative and just wanted to get married, not sexual radicals who wanted to separatism and the overthrow of the patriarchy. Slowly as tolerance and integration increases gay culture will die, which'll be sad.
Overwhelmingly?
Quote from: garbon on March 01, 2014, 10:28:47 AM
Overwhelmingly?
Yeah. The number of gays for marriage and the 'integrative' route seems to hugely outweigh the old radicals.
Oh. Well I think the core is still in the whatevs. Not clinging to radical or rushingtowards marriage. Some anemic version of gay culture will continue to exist as long as there are gay bars. I could see those still continuing as it is easier to suss someone out than at a bar serving wider population.
Latvia and Lithuana have invoked NATO's Article 4, says the Guardian.
Quote from: celedhring on March 01, 2014, 03:29:06 PM
Latvia and Lithuana have invoked NATO's Article 4, says the Guardian.
Man, that's really going to complicate Spike Lee's gentrification issues.
Too many windows opened at the same time. My bad.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 01, 2014, 03:32:12 PM
Quote from: celedhring on March 01, 2014, 03:29:06 PM
Latvia and Lithuana have invoked NATO's Article 4, says the Guardian.
Man, that's really going to complicate Spike Lee's gentrification issues.
MOTHERFUCKIN' LATVIAN HIPSTERS
Quote from: celedhring on March 01, 2014, 03:33:05 PM
Too many windows opened at the same time. My bad.
Post a link in the other thread?
Black History Momph is now over. Moving on.
Quote from: 11B4V on March 01, 2014, 09:18:56 PM
Black History Momph is now over. Moving on.
I await the 11 part epic "12 years a Slave Owner" for the remaining 11 White History Months detailing the struggles of producing enough cotton to service the debt contracted for the field hands picking the cotton along with the mental anguish suffered by the overseer after whipping one slave to many to the bone.
Have you been drinking?
Quote from: CountDeMoney on February 08, 2014, 06:53:07 PM
Once the heart of Portland's African-African community
Yes, at one point I believe all four of them lived there.
Quote from: fhdz on March 02, 2014, 12:21:55 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on February 08, 2014, 06:53:07 PM
Once the heart of Portland's African-African community
Yes, at one point I believe all four of them lived there.
The Trailblazers have 15 guys on their roster.
They all live in Lake Oswego though. :(
Quote from: 11B4V on March 01, 2014, 09:18:56 PM
Black History Momph is now over. Moving on.
Now back to our regularly scheduled program: 11 months of history on the SS.
Quote from: Neil on March 01, 2014, 11:32:15 PM
Have you been drinking?
Not enough, never enough?
BTW, why is Black History Month always the shortest month?
Quote from: Viking on March 02, 2014, 05:55:32 AM
Quote from: Neil on March 01, 2014, 11:32:15 PM
Have you been drinking?
Not enough, never enough?
BTW, why is Black History Month always the shortest month?
I was told it's because of Douglass' birthday falling on February, and black history remembrance sprouting from its celebration.
Quote from: celedhring on March 02, 2014, 06:31:36 AM
Quote from: Viking on March 02, 2014, 05:55:32 AM
Quote from: Neil on March 01, 2014, 11:32:15 PM
Have you been drinking?
Not enough, never enough?
BTW, why is Black History Month always the shortest month?
I was told it's because of Douglass' birthday falling on February, and black history remembrance sprouting from its celebration.
Well, Martin Luther King and George Washington Carver were born in January.
Harriet Tubman, march.
Booker T Washington, april.
etc.etc.
Pretty sure that Black History Month (or its precursors) is way older than Martin Luther King. Can't say for the others.
It is shorter by 2-3 days in a typical year. :rolleyes:
Quote from: 11B4V on March 01, 2014, 09:18:56 PM
Black History Momph is now over. Moving on.
Damn and we have to wait all the way until May for Asian Pacific American Heritage Month.
Quote from: Viking on March 02, 2014, 05:55:32 AM
BTW, why is Black History Month always the shortest month?
Came out of celebrating birthdays of Lincoln and Douglass - both in February.
Black history month in the UK is in October. LGBT history month is in February.
Quote from: Sheilbh on March 02, 2014, 06:41:27 PM
Quote from: Viking on March 02, 2014, 05:55:32 AM
BTW, why is Black History Month always the shortest month?
LGBT history month is in February.
Oh, goodie
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.huffpost.com%2Fgen%2F797824%2Fthumbs%2Fr-6239929979_25833F7DCA_Z-large570.jpg%3F7&hash=ae7cc1e504798d21ebf6b647d7691a20d7b6164e)
Quote from: Valmy on March 02, 2014, 06:38:14 PM
Quote from: 11B4V on March 01, 2014, 09:18:56 PM
Black History Momph is now over. Moving on.
Damn and we have to wait all the way until May for Asian Pacific American Heritage Month.
We're now in Irish-American Heritage Month...well that or Women's History Month.
Nobody pays any attention to the other something history months. Not that we pay a whole lot to Black History month, but it does get mentioned.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on March 02, 2014, 07:03:57 PM
Not that we pay a whole lot to Black History month, but it does get mentioned.
Some of us pay more attention than others. :mad: Because it's the Right Thing To Do.
I generally paid attention until I'd gone through the batting order twice.
Not all blacks are good at athletics. That's a racist attitude.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 02, 2014, 08:17:30 PM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on March 02, 2014, 07:03:57 PM
Not that we pay a whole lot to Black History month, but it does get mentioned.
Some of us pay more attention than others. :mad: Because it's the Right Thing To Do.
I d'int take you as the PC type. :P
Quote from: 11B4V on March 02, 2014, 08:35:27 PM
I d'int take you as the PC type. :P
I embrace the rich heritage of diversity that makes up the unique milieu that is our United States of America.
:lol:
Quote from: 11B4V on March 02, 2014, 06:48:25 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on March 02, 2014, 06:41:27 PM
Quote from: Viking on March 02, 2014, 05:55:32 AM
BTW, why is Black History Month always the shortest month?
LGBT history month is in February.
Oh, goodie
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.huffpost.com%2Fgen%2F797824%2Fthumbs%2Fr-6239929979_25833F7DCA_Z-large570.jpg%3F7&hash=ae7cc1e504798d21ebf6b647d7691a20d7b6164e)
That is enough transphobia out of you now.
He clearly has a problem with genderfluid pansexuals :mad: