|
Post by einebierbitte on Dec 30, 2008 15:25:02 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by linda712 on Dec 30, 2008 17:24:29 GMT -4
Naw, Twiggy's got the scoop....
|
|
|
Post by jake on Dec 30, 2008 18:28:37 GMT -4
So Lynn, if we don't discuss Black history, what should we discuss. Obvisiously educating all about Black history seems to be a threat to you and your little friends. Don't worry! you guys will continue to be heard and seen.. give someone else a chance and find JESUS. twiggy, where did Lynn say we shouldn't be educating people about black history??? seems you are the one feeling threatened.
|
|
|
Post by funnel101 on Dec 30, 2008 19:10:40 GMT -4
Note to new users: please read the entire thread before jumping in and posting.
|
|
|
Post by AquaHolic on Dec 30, 2008 20:18:58 GMT -4
Note to new users: please read the entire thread before jumping in and posting. Yes...what Funnel says...Don't assume things from the subject line...many ideas were discussed... Barb
|
|
|
Post by rudyhayesforever on Jan 3, 2009 5:14:32 GMT -4
What exactly is Black History Month ever going to hurt?? And to those that think we should promote "White History Month" in the schools - what exactly is every day in history class??
|
|
|
Post by falgar25 on Jan 3, 2009 8:36:35 GMT -4
One thing <pick-a-group> history month hurts is it emphasizes the differences between us rather than the similarities. It is exclusive rather than inclusive.
Let's include all history in American History classes rather than deciding that American History is dead-white-guy history and every other identifiable group needs its own special history month.
I don't think I'm explaining this well but I can't come up with the right words. I just don't think that establishing the membership of "us" and "them" is an effective way to get to a country of "we". Black History Month and Hispanic Heritage Month and Asian-Pacific American Heritage Month and Alaskan American Heritage Month and any others out there seem to be more effective at pointing out how we are different rather than how we are one.
EDIT: I just went back and reread a number of the posts in this thread. What I was trying to write has already been explained really well in many of those posts.
|
|
|
Post by AquaHolic on Jan 3, 2009 10:30:17 GMT -4
What exactly is Black History Month ever going to hurt?? And to those that think we should promote "White History Month" in the schools - what exactly is every day in history class?? No one is saying promote White History...what is being discussed in this thread is to not separate the History anymore...study it all with out separation. The more we separate....the more we stay separate. For example...a Unit in History studying something...then the next Unit studying something else is fine..but to dedicate an entire month to one specific color of people just further points out how we are separate. Isn't it better to make us One in history...after all it took all of us of every color to get where we are. Barb Edit: I just read Falgars post...we are saying the same thing...lol..should have read all the new posts first before I posted. Sorry for the repeat.
|
|
|
Post by RobMoore on Jan 3, 2009 12:29:13 GMT -4
^ That ... and why does one racial minority get preferential treatment over all the other minorities? We only have 12 months, if we gave each of them to a specific group, we'd still have groups left over without a month. How do we decide which groups get months? The largest ones? Isn't the "majority rules" system exactly the opposite of what "black history month" is supposed to be about? Maybe they should say "We've had our time in the spotlight, its time the Eskimos had a month, or maybe the Maylaysian month".
|
|
|
Post by funnel101 on Jan 3, 2009 12:46:19 GMT -4
By the way, for anyone interested in learning more about our history (not the stuff you learn in high school), I'm reading Howard Zinn's "A People's History of the United States" and learning a lot.
|
|
|
Post by RobMoore on Jan 3, 2009 20:54:18 GMT -4
"Objectivity is impossible and it is also undesirable" Howard Zinn
This quote makes me suspect of his writings. I might give it a chance if possible, but I don't think I'll be buying it. Thinking too emotionally is a characteristic I deplore in my politicians, so I don't think I should like it in my political writers.
|
|
|
Post by funnel101 on Jan 5, 2009 12:28:36 GMT -4
His "A People's History" just tells our history from a different perspective than the history textbooks do. He focuses on popular movements: labor riots, civil rights protests, etc; and how government decisions affected people.
|
|
|
Post by RobMoore on Jan 5, 2009 18:43:51 GMT -4
OK
|
|
|
Post by dej on Jan 6, 2009 3:41:49 GMT -4
Awhile back I did take the time to read portions of "A People's History" online. He certainly does not make any pretense at objectivity. In fact, he despises this country so much it skews some of his points almost to being fiction.
One example of that is the chapter where he discusses our entry into WWII. In there he writes "In short, if the entrance of the United States into World War II was (as so many Americans believed at the time, observing the Nazi invasions) to defend the principle of nonintervention in the affairs of other countries, the nation's record cast doubt on its ability to uphold that principle."
The statement in itself is blatently false. Most Americans at the time did not believe we went to to defend other nations from Nazi invasions. They believed we went to war because the Japanese (who were Allies of the Germans) attacked us at Pearl Harbor followed by declarations of war. There had been an ongoing debate in this country prior to the attack about whether or not to get involved, but there were a sufficient number of people taking a somewhat "isolationist" stance to actually keep us out of the war until Pearl Harbor.
What is ironic is that after several paragraphs of condemning American actions overseas in the preceding decades, he does get around to acknowledging the Pearl Harbor attack was actually what triggered our entry into the war. Even then he complains we didn't enter the war for "humane" reasons, such as the bombing of Chinese civilians by Japan in the late 1930's. With his warped perspective, even if we had entered the war in 1937 to protect the Chinese civilians, he would have assigned imperialist motives to that as well.
An even more distorted view compares Nazi anti-Semitism to treatment of blacks in this country where he says "blacks, looking at anti-Semitism in Germany, might not see their own situation in the U.S. as much different." . While this country did have shameful government policies of segregation at the time, they hardly compare to a policy of genocide. He also refers to our Japanese-American internment camps as "close to direct duplication of Fascism." Again, while a shameful practice, it hardly rises to the level of duplicating the Nazi camps, with perhaps the greatest difference being the shower heads in our camps sprayed water, not gas.
In my opinion, a comment by Georgetown history professor Michael Kazin summed up the greatest weakness of Zinn's writing. He said that "A People's History fails to explain why the American political-economic model continues to attract millions of minorities, women, workers, and immigrants, or why the socialist and radical political movements Zinn favors have failed to gain widespread support among the American public."
|
|
|
Post by funnel101 on Jan 6, 2009 13:29:22 GMT -4
I thought it was worth reading, though, because a lot of the events he covers in detail I had never even heard about.
|
|
|
Post by pete1 on Jan 12, 2009 5:15:16 GMT -4
Correct me if I'm wrong...........Lincoln freed the slaves which made them equal under the law. Their rights were then denied by the Courts, the Police, the Politicians, the good Christians, and the rest of the citizens who lacked the courage to stand up for the little guy. Blacks put their pants on one leg at a time, and shed blood in every war this country fought
|
|
|
Post by RobMoore on Jan 12, 2009 8:10:59 GMT -4
....and?
|
|
|
Post by lynn on Feb 19, 2009 12:55:43 GMT -4
Eine, thanks for getting my back for me! I had too much going on for awhile here. I got quite a chuckle from Twiggy's post and the follow ups.
|
|
|
Post by lynn on Feb 19, 2009 13:08:59 GMT -4
By the way, for anyone interested in learning more about our history (not the stuff you learn in high school), I'm reading Howard Zinn's "A People's History of the United States" and learning a lot. I read a bit of Zinn's writings many years ago and had a hard time digesting the crap he was saying. I do like reading personal views on different things, but when someone promotes himself as an expert and spews out what his perceived opinions of "facts" are, I almost have to read the material as a piece of fiction. Fast forward many years later, I pick up a book written by Michael Moore (why I don't know, I can't stand Michael Moore, maybe morbid curiousity). On the back there was a praise written by someone that proclaimed something like "following in the footsteps of Howard Zinn..." , I laughed when I put the book down. I remembered, oh yeah, I couldn't stand Zinn either.
|
|
|
Post by lynn on Feb 19, 2009 13:14:48 GMT -4
I was happy to see at the CVS this month fliers stating "Celebrate American Heart Month".
I know it is a drug store and it is the month with Valentines Day, but its nice to hear of a business not promoting a segregation of race.
|
|
|
Post by lynn on Feb 19, 2009 13:17:08 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by linda712 on Feb 19, 2009 13:41:11 GMT -4
LYNN!!!! SO GOOD TO HEAR FROM YOU, GAL!!! Welcome back!
|
|
|
Post by lynn on Feb 19, 2009 13:49:02 GMT -4
LYNN!!!! SO GOOD TO HEAR FROM YOU, GAL!!! Welcome back! Oh, thank you. I've just been pretty busy. I count my blessings that I do have a lot that is keeping me busy. I wish I had a solution for those who are struggling right now.
|
|
|
Post by linda712 on Feb 19, 2009 13:53:33 GMT -4
....as do we all.....but I am very glad to see you.
|
|