|
Post by Wormtown Railers Fan on Jun 11, 2020 11:49:14 GMT -5
I'm amazed that the NFL Redskins mascot still survives in D.C. And when Native Americans were polled in regards to the Redskins nickname 90% were not offended. If Native Americans don’t care then who is offended on their behalf?
|
|
|
Post by Crucis#1 on Jun 11, 2020 11:59:00 GMT -5
RGS 1. Lee owned slaves--individually and in the role of fiduciary of his father in law's estate. 2. Southern soldiers may have thought they were fighting for their states, but the only reason their states needed soldiers was because they had seceded and they seceded because Lincoln was elected and was opposed to the expansion of slavery. alum, 1. When his father-in-law died, Lee gave money to every slave and set him (or her) free. Three men were too old to support themselves so he and his family supporeed them for the rest oof their lives in gratitude for their lifetimes of service. Dis he "own" slaves? Only for the few hours it took him go clear the paperwork for thsir freedom. 2. There was no clear rule about leavting the United States and some legal experts believed (and believe today) the South had the legal right to do so. Withdrawal is never mentioned in the Constitution. What settled the legal issue was the Northern victory in the Civil War. You dismiss quite easily the fact that most confederate soldiers never owned a slave. IMHO, that is not a minor point. Are you aware that when the Emancipation Proclamation was read to U.S. troops, two entire Federal regiments put down their arms, said they would not fight to free slaves, and went home? Why weren't they prosecuted for desertion? Possibly because that feeling was so common among troops in the Federal Army. Southern States were not only opposed to the freedom for slaves, they were opposed to Federal taxation that used money paid by Southern farmers to benefit Northern factory owners. “Supported them”, really? It was overdue deferred compensation!
|
|
|
Post by Crucis#1 on Jun 11, 2020 12:09:11 GMT -5
I'm amazed that the NFL Redskins mascot still survives in D.C. And when Native Americans were polled in regards to the Redskins nickname 90% were not offended. If Native Americans don’t care then who is offended on their behalf? You know what they say about statistics. Statistics don’t lie, but ......., 90%, really? Cite a valid current poll, by an independent credible organization Have you ever had a conversation with an enrolled member of a Native American Tribe? Attended a tribal gathering? Too bad you never spent time with JVC on a reservation or in a Native cultural center in the mid or south west. The term is as offensive as any derogatory term, which is why George Preston Marshall chose the name. His granddaughter, Jordan Wright, has condemned the team name. www.washingtonpost.com/local/granddaughter-of-former-redskins-owner-george-p-marshall-condemns-teams-name/2014/07/22/eb9dd3b0-11cd-11e4-9285-4243a40ddc97_story.htmlI would have hoped that by now, there would have been an enlightment that any ethnic slur is unacceptable, without equivocation.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Jun 11, 2020 12:11:54 GMT -5
I'm amazed that the NFL Redskins mascot still survives in D.C. And when Native Americans were polled in regards to the Redskins nickname 90% were not offended. If Native Americans don’t care then who is offended on their behalf? The Lakota Sioux liked having the "Fighting Sioux" as the nickname of North Dakota (and many of them played for this school's football team). Nevertheless, when the NCAA insisted, the college spent millions changing the nickname everywhere connected to the school. Speaking with many of the Lakota was enlightening in regard to their options about what constitutes racism and what, for them, is pride and tradition.
|
|
|
Post by alum on Jun 11, 2020 12:19:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by hc87 on Jun 11, 2020 12:23:01 GMT -5
Do I really have to explain the difference to this learned group between a derogatory term like "Redskins" and a more honorable term like "Fighting Sioux," "Seminoles," "Chiefs" or even "Indians?"
|
|
|
Post by Crucis#1 on Jun 11, 2020 12:26:55 GMT -5
And when Native Americans were polled in regards to the Redskins nickname 90% were not offended. If Native Americans don’t care then who is offended on their behalf? The Lakota Sioux liked having the "Fighting Sioux" as the nickname of North Dakota (and many of them played for this school's football team). Nevertheless, when the NCAA insisted, the college spent millions changing the nickname everywhere connected to the school. Speaking with many of the Lakota was enlightening in regard to their options about what constitutes racism and what, for them, is pride and tradition. The term “FIghting Sioux” a perpetuation of a stereotype? Maybe some Tribal members liked the name, to remind non Natives that their struggle is not over in regard to human rights. I know first hand from a from a very close friend and her family, who is Osage Sioux that the term “Fighting Sioux”, is not one of endearment. It is one of warning. The same can be said for “Fighting Christians”, formerly the mascot of Elon University, as well as the most famous of all Fighting Stereotypes with the team that resides in South Bend Indiana.
|
|
|
Post by Wormtown Railers Fan on Jun 11, 2020 12:27:19 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by WCHC Sports on Jun 11, 2020 12:28:01 GMT -5
www.espn.com/racing/nascar/story/_/id/29294475/the-confederate-flag-gone-nascar-races-miss-secondI don't follow NASCAR, but I liked the article. The swastika was a sign of good luck in Asia thousands of years before the Nazis appropriated it. Can we say that the recent history, or bastardization of the original meaning, has so blatantly overtaken what it was meant to stand for, or in effect did stand for, to the point that it can no longer be seen in the original context? While not as extreme, I feel the Confederate Flag-- or particular battle flags as RGS knows the specifics of (I was ignorant, and would imagine the general public is)-- has been told to us presents a similar circumstance. It stands for the sentiment of dissent and slavery and subjugation of disenfranchised people.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Jun 11, 2020 12:31:01 GMT -5
alum,
I am familiar with that article, having read it. Where are the primary sources that go with this secondary - or tertiary - article? I was not able to find any in the link you posted. I am afraid if that is the best you can do, there is not much there. There are direct quotes in the article but it was not shown where they came from so they could be checked . I have found the use of quotes (partial or out of context) to make a point and that makes me question such arguments. I am also aware of primary sources from my studies of historiography. (Gar Alperovitz received acclaim And several awards until serious examination of his work (on "nuclear diplomacy" and Potsdam) showed it to be both misleading and simply wrong.
hc87 - I have never supported "Redskins" as a mascot - your distinction is certainly a valid one.
|
|
|
Post by WCHC Sports on Jun 11, 2020 12:34:43 GMT -5
Not at all saying the article is factual or stands as the record of history, but only saying that I appreciated his opinion. I liked the way he drew parallels to a symbol that used to stand for something--even if for thousands of years longer-- could be made to mean something far different, and far worse, without the opportunity for folks to recognize the former meaning and avoid the more-recent hate.
|
|
|
Post by Sons of Vaval on Jun 11, 2020 12:35:48 GMT -5
I don't really think the overwhelming majority of people who hang a Confederate flag are advocating for the return of slavery. Hard to argue that. But would you agree that there are some people who hang a Confederate flag that would be glad to have slavery back? Or perhaps not so dramatically, would in private admit that they are bigoted towards black people?
I think of it more from a patriotic standpoint (although I am not black, so I am told I cannot relate relative to slavery)... waving the flag of a rebellious/insurrectionist group of folks. If you wanted to secede so badly, then get the hell out and stop citing the Constitution of the country that you want to be separated from so badly as the reason as why you're allowed to tout it.
Like every group, there are ass***** in them. Sure, some bigots who hang this flag probably want a return to the 1840s and slavery -- I believe that the overwhelming majority do not. Pulling this from Wikipedia -- Many Southerners associate the Confederate battle flag with pride in Southern heritage, states' rights, historical commemoration of the American Civil War; while others around the country associate it with historical revisionism and glorification of the Civil War (i.e. the Lost Cause myth), racism, slavery, segregation, white supremacy, attempted intimidations of African-Americans and treason.I don't really care about the Confederate flag, but I'm not one to say that one should not be allowed to hang it. Let's remember that the American flag is offensive to some people abroad, along with some people domestic. I suppose, like most things, it is in the eye of the beholder.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Jun 11, 2020 12:42:33 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by alum on Jun 11, 2020 12:44:36 GMT -5
alum, I am familiar with that article, having read it. Where are the primary sources that go with this secondary - or tertiary - article? I was not able to find any in the link you posted. I am afraid if that is the best you can do, there is not much there. There are direct quotes in the article but it was not shown where they came from so they could be checked . I have found the use of quotes (partial or out of context) to make a point and that makes me question such arguments. I am also aware of primary sources from my studies of historiography. (Gar Alperovitz received acclaim And several awards until serious examination of his work (on "nuclear diplomacy" and Potsdam) showed it to be both misleading and simply wrong. hc87 - I have never supported "Redskins" as a mascot - your distinction is certainly a valid one. Pryor had access to the original family records. I guess you can claim she reported incorrectly about what they said or that the author of this Atlantic piece misstated what Pryor wrote. I have to tell you, however, that you really do seem to be sticking your head in the sand. While Lee may have thought that slavery was wrong, he expressed his thoughts in a 1856 letter in which he wrote: I think it however a greater evil to the white man than to the black race, & while my feelings are strongly enlisted in behalf of the latter, my sympathies are more strong for the former. The blacks are immeasurably better off here than in Africa, morally, socially & physically. The painful discipline they are undergoing, is necessary for their instruction as a race, & I hope will prepare & lead them to better things. How long their subjugation may be necessary is known & ordered by a wise Merciful Providence. Their emancipation will sooner result from the mild & melting influence of Christianity, than the storms & tempests of fiery Controversy.
I will attempt to find Ms. Pryor's book and read it upon my completion of a couple other books sitting on coffee table. I will report back to you via PM once I am done.
|
|
|
Post by Crucis#1 on Jun 11, 2020 12:45:56 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by WCHC Sports on Jun 11, 2020 12:46:32 GMT -5
Again reasonable point, and I can't say you're wrong. I'm not from the South so "Southern Pride" is another one I have to claim ignorance on, despite having my doubts.
I'll die on the hill that as far as symbology goes, assholes-in-all-groups theory aside (which I agree with too), the Confederate Flag would be associated with more of those bigoted assholes as an item of specific symbology than the American flag.
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Jun 11, 2020 13:12:06 GMT -5
This is a bit of a tangent with respect to symbolism, but not much.
The title of the tune that the French Navy band plays is (in English) 'March of the soldiers of Robert Bruce'.
Robert the Bruce was a Scot, who led the Scots against the English king Edward II, and defeated Edward and his army. A century later, 10,000 Scots arrived in France to join the army of the Maid of Orleans. They marched to that tune. Joan of Arc and her forces defeated the English.
I have found no recording of the March of the soldiers of Robert Bruce played by a British military band, including bands from Scotland, or any British band for that matter. The tune, somber and recessional, is the anthem of the French marines.
Nearly 600 years later, the French have not forgotten, nor for that matter apparently, have the British.
|
|
|
Post by Wormtown Railers Fan on Jun 11, 2020 13:38:14 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Jun 11, 2020 13:50:04 GMT -5
Easy answer--it will not end until public sentiment turns loudly against the nonsense. A very vocal minority will outshout the "silent majority".
We put up with the PC nonsense and so it grows and grows. It becomes a competition among the warriors as to who can be the first to detect the transgression and register the indignant outrage against it. Lavrenty Beria, Stalin's henchman, said "Show me the man and I'll show you the crime". In like fashion, today we have "Show me the statue, work of art, book, cartoon, song, movie, etc and I'll show you the offensive message it sends".
|
|
|
Post by Crucis#1 on Jun 11, 2020 13:55:31 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Wormtown Railers Fan on Jun 11, 2020 14:00:08 GMT -5
My last post on this since we are dangerously close to political discussion. I think most people are able to make the distinction between the Paw Patrol cartoon puppies and a viscous real person like Bull Connor.
|
|
|
Post by Sons of Vaval on Jun 11, 2020 14:06:50 GMT -5
Isn't the issue with Paw Patrol is that it casts a cartoon police officer in a good / heroic light, which goes against the narrative perpetrated upon the country that they are violent and racist people?
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Jun 11, 2020 14:11:07 GMT -5
That is the problem that some see. They do not want any positive images associated with the police.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Jun 11, 2020 14:55:57 GMT -5
Isn't the issue with Paw Patrol is that it casts a cartoon police officer in a good / heroic light, which goes against the narrative perpetrated upon the country that they are violent and racist people? ‘Live PD’, a popular A&E show hosted by Dan Abrams that might show cops in a positive light (or at least an accurate light) was just cancelled. (“Cops” was cancelled a few days ago.)
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Jun 11, 2020 15:38:16 GMT -5
alum, 1. When his father-in-law died, Lee gave money to every slave and set him (or her) free. Three men were too old to support themselves so he and his family supporeed them for the rest oof their lives in gratitude for their lifetimes of service. Dis he "own" slaves? Only for the few hours it took him go clear the paperwork for thsir freedom. 2. There was no clear rule about leavting the United States and some legal experts believed (and believe today) the South had the legal right to do so. Withdrawal is never mentioned in the Constitution. What settled the legal issue was the Northern victory in the Civil War. You dismiss quite easily the fact that most confederate soldiers never owned a slave. IMHO, that is not a minor point. Are you aware that when the Emancipation Proclamation was read to U.S. troops, two entire Federal regiments put down their arms, said they would not fight to free slaves, and went home? Why weren't they prosecuted for desertion? Possibly because that feeling was so common among troops in the Federal Army. Southern States were not only opposed to the freedom for slaves, they were opposed to Federal taxation that used money paid by Southern farmers to benefit Northern factory owners. “Supported them”, really? It was overdue deferred compensation! The Civil War is fascinating. There is a farm near me that set up a "book stop" in a farm shed during the shut down where you can drop off your used books, CDs, DVDs, etc. and pick up other ones to read and watch while we are staying home more. I picked up "Cold Mountain" which was gripping. Hollywood interpretation of the facts I'm sure, but it whetted my appetite to learn more about the Civil War as time goes by.
|
|