Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 180

Thread: Smithsonian Group Museum Engages in... White... Supremacy?

  1. #81

    Default Re: Smithsonian Group Museum Engages in... White... Supremacy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Aexodus View Post
    This is a business model, that poses as anti-racism ideas and even training for schools and companies, when in fact it is a regressive, racialist ideology.

    It posits that racial identity is all encompassing and inescapable, and that we can’t overcome tribal divisions.
    It is part of the changing narrative where it is now problematic to 'not see race'.
    As one of the activist instructors at Evergreen put it:
    "For a lot of people their race is really important to them. It is a really important mark of their identity. And for you to be like that doesn't exist you're telling them they don't exist in some ways."

    I wonder how long it will be before the 'race is not real' science changes...

  2. #82

    Default Re: Smithsonian Group Museum Engages in... White... Supremacy?

    "If you have always believed that people should be judged by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin, that would have gotten you labeled a radical 60 years ago, a liberal 30 years ago and a racist today."

    Paraphrasing Thomas Sowell
    Ignore List (to save time):

    Exarch, Coughdrop addict

  3. #83

    Default Re: Smithsonian Group Museum Engages in... White... Supremacy?

    The problem is the racism that continues to conflate culture with "race"(color, ethnicity, etc.). White, Black, Brown is not a culture. The racist is the one who say's that it is, and are blinded by their own racism. You can say a majority of a "race" is hardworking, but it is certainly not exclusive to that "race", or even to that culture. You can take any "race" and transplant them to any culture and they will conform to that culture. It's rather simple, and I have seen something similar already posted on this thread. If you can replace "brown" with "black" or any other "race" and it sounds racist, then it most likely is. So yes Robin Diangelo has a racist ideology and doesn't even realize it.

  4. #84

    Default Re: Smithsonian Group Museum Engages in... White... Supremacy?

    "We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable."

    https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-we-believe/


    This is not an attack on the "nuclear family" concept. On the contrary, the "idea" of a nuclear family as an ideal family arrangement is the dominant and incumbent thought in current society. In fact, one of the most quoted "facts" espoused by both White and Black ideologues is that African American (and others, inducing Whites) poverty is partly caused by the prevalence of single mothers in society. A common policy prescription espoused by Republicans and other conservatives, is that nuclear families are a solution to this poverty. In other words, the concept of a nuclear family is the one oppressing all other family unit arrangements.

    In my opinion, the Black Lives Matter statement is a reaction (especially to conservative opposition to gay marriage and gay families for example) to the dominant position that the nuclear family concept currently inhabits. The idea here, is not to abolish the nuclear family as a possible familial arrangement, nor is it even to make such a concept "wrong" through groupthink and public debate, but instead to argue that the nuclear family is not the most ideal family arrangement possible. The fact that so many in this thread, and in public discourse see such a statement as an "attack" on the nuclear family concept is telling. This kind of reactionary discourse stinks precisely of the same intellectual thought that brought and continues to rationalize Donald Trump's presidency as well as other nationalist and alt-right movements around the world. The moment you are that type of conservative reactionary, you are simply looking for things to be outraged about (counter-outrage, what a funny term).

    Now I personally think that the nuclear family is the ideal way to organize a family unit. But I don't think it should be used as a way to chastise gays, or single black mothers, or any other arrangement that I don't find ideal. Or that it is correct to argue that "in aggregate the nuclear family is the superior way to maximize national economic and social welfare." Individuals should have the right to choose the way they organize their personal lives, and their aspirations to argue for the merits of their way of life, in no way attacks my preferences.

  5. #85

    Default Re: Smithsonian Group Museum Engages in... White... Supremacy?

    BLM simply wants to absolve absent and/or reckless parents of their responsibilities. That's why they - a movement purporting to be opposing police brutality - are even commenting on this issue at all. They know full-well that there are strong correlations between single-parent households, poverty, underachievement and criminality. They also know that single-motherhood is an acute problem in African-American households. But rather than confronting this reality, they'd rather excuse poor family planning among African Americans by launching Marxian attacks against the nuclear family.



  6. #86

    Default Re: Smithsonian Group Museum Engages in... White... Supremacy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cope View Post
    BLM simply wants to absolve absent and/or reckless parents of their responsibilities.
    Dastardly plot uncovered. It's all part of the Black Agenda.

    That's why they - a movement purporting to be opposing police brutality - are even commenting on this issue at all. They know full-well that there are strong correlations between single-parent households, poverty, underachievement and criminality. They also know that single-motherhood is an acute problem in African-American households. But rather than confronting this reality, they'd rather excuse poor family planning among African Americans by launching Marxian attacks against the nuclear family.
    Unlikely. On the other hand, this tirade is a perfect example of why conservatives are so tone-deaf. You'd rather point out failings and launch counter-accusations, rather than acknowledge any failure in policing and government policy. Regardless of what insidious agenda you think the statement has, treating the BLM statement as an attack on your values tells us everything we need to know the intellectual framework underpinning modern conservatism.

  7. #87

    Default Re: Smithsonian Group Museum Engages in... White... Supremacy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Love Mountain View Post
    Dastardly plot uncovered. It's all part of the Black Agenda.



    Unlikely. On the other hand, this tirade is a perfect example of why conservatives are so tone-deaf. You'd rather point out failings and launch counter-accusations, rather than acknowledge any failure in policing and government policy. Regardless of what insidious agenda you think the statement has, treating the BLM statement as an attack on your values tells us everything we need to know the intellectual framework underpinning modern conservatism.
    Non of this refutes my remarks. It's just a a series of generic partisan complaints. Next.



  8. #88

    Default Re: Smithsonian Group Museum Engages in... White... Supremacy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cope View Post
    Non of this refutes my remarks. It's just a a series of generic partisan complaints. Next.
    1. You're assuming I'm disagreeing with the substantive portion of your post, I don't. As I stated before, it's not secret to me that single motherhood contributes to poverty, which contributes to a host of other unfavorable outcomes.
    2. Your entire post, as well as the last several pages, was whining about how a rather innocuous BLM statements represents an overarching far-left effort to dismantle Western civilization, which, according to conservatives, will be unsuccessful anyway because MAGA.

    The type of ugly remarks that came out of this thread are rather amusing. I'd high five the person who included that line on that page.
    Last edited by Abdülmecid I; July 27, 2020 at 10:44 AM. Reason: Unnecessary.

  9. #89
    Muizer's Avatar member 3519
    Patrician Artifex Magistrate

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    11,087

    Default Re: Smithsonian Group Museum Engages in... White... Supremacy?

    You know, I find the thesis that race inequality continues to exist as a result of a dominant, normative European culture worth exploring. However I also find this is sadly virtually impossible to do in the presence of those who either are seemingly unwilling (or unable?) to even consider that angle, as well as those who seem quite aware but actually think that is the way it should stay. What is the point of considering pros and cons of an idea with an audience that is deaf to one side of the argument? It makes both their support and criticism pointless. Their only merit is to serve as anecdotal evidence, as symptoms, of that which we should be discussing.
    Last edited by Muizer; July 27, 2020 at 03:03 AM.
    "Lay these words to heart, Lucilius, that you may scorn the pleasure which comes from the applause of the majority. Many men praise you; but have you any reason for being pleased with yourself, if you are a person whom the many can understand?" - Lucius Annaeus Seneca -

  10. #90
    Mithradates's Avatar Domesticus
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Hungary
    Posts
    2,192

    Default Re: Smithsonian Group Museum Engages in... White... Supremacy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Muizer View Post
    You know, I find the thesis that race inequality continues to exist as a result of a dominant, normative European culture worth exploring. However I also find this is sadly virtually impossible to do in the presence of those who either are seemingly unwilling (or unable?) to even consider that angle, as well as those who seem quite aware but actually think that is the way it should stay. What is the point of considering pros and cons of an idea with an audience that is deaf to one side of the argument? It makes both their support and criticism pointless. Their only merit is to serve as anecdotal evidence, as symptoms, of that which we should be discussing.
    Well, Im neither of those so thats one, I bet there are others here too who would like to hear your opinion on this thesis.

  11. #91

    Default Re: Smithsonian Group Museum Engages in... White... Supremacy?

    Objective, rational linear thinking
    Cause and effect relationships
    Quantitative emphasis
    ie the "Scientific Method"
    (or as it was put at the Evergreen protests a few years back: ''You're gonna use your rational bull[censored]. Wub you', and 'You need to stop demanding that people use logic and reason, and white forms of knowledge').

    What are the pros and cons of considering these things as "White Dominant Culture", or "White supremacy" or as 'bullwub', "white forms of knowledge"?
    Last edited by Infidel144; July 27, 2020 at 05:31 AM.

  12. #92

    Default Re: Smithsonian Group Museum Engages in... White... Supremacy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Aexodus View Post
    I think this piece sums up a few of my feelings on the whiteness studies racket. https://nymag.com/intelligencer/amp/...ram-kendi.html

    This is a business model, that poses as anti-racism ideas and even training for schools and companies, when in fact it is a regressive, racialist ideology.

    It posits that racial identity is all encompassing and inescapable, and that we can’t overcome tribal divisions. It robs people of their agency, such as the famous baseball player that ‘broke the colour bar’ as the article put it to be the first black player; Robinson.

    The most dangerous element of it, is the influence it has. In their moral panic amidst the rabid anti-racism and anti-police rhetoric at the moment, our heads of schools, executives and other influential persons are turning to anti-racist cranks for ‘bias training’, which teaches these ideas to the populace. The worst part is how it is being taught to out teachers and educators, endangering their political objectivity when their indoctrination then begins to affect their students.
    Quote Originally Posted by Infidel144 View Post
    Objective, rational linear thinking
    Cause and effect relationships
    Quantitative emphasis
    ie the "Scientific Method"
    (or as it was put at the Evergreen protests a few years back: ''You're gonna use your rational bull[censored]. Wub you', and 'You need to stop demanding that people use logic and reason, and white forms of knowledge').

    What are the pros and cons of considering these things as "White Dominant Culture", or "White supremacy" or as 'bullwub', "white forms of knowledge"?
    The latest iteration of the “anti-racism” narrative is a mirror image of the white supremacist talking points it claims to undermine, and the MSM talking points formerly employed to refute them by endorsing a pluralistic civil society are now derided as the complicity of “white/brown silence.”
    I must say that I neither support the Lefties who from 1832 Emancipation Act showed that their support for Blacks was limited to freedom but not equity with Whites. We know what the Labor Party did in the Sixties in Africa and with Zimbabwe in 1997. Can the Black heartland, Africa’s largest population and market, ever forgive Obama’s anti-Africa foreign policies and regime changes in Nigeria, Ghana, Brazil and others through corruption propaganda? So, left or right wing, we are still talking of the same White supremacy bird. However Blacks on the left still have some ideological credibility to take on the racist capitalist system, but Black conservatives?

    From when I first heard of Alan Keyes, to the brain surgeon Presidential candidate, and now Candace Owens, all dubiously intelligent Black people, I cannot understand what they are actually trying to conserve as Black Conservative spokesmen. I can’t understand how a Black British Conservatives can argue for Brexit and the stopping of immigrants to keep Britain White and English. Candace argued that they must conserve the demographic spread in favor of Whites by stopping immigration. This is the height of mental and cultural slavery.

    So, when Black people return from the Ivy league universities of Harvard and Oxford with their Master-borrow-me ideologies, some of us have to ask what are they trying to conserve, our masters influences or our true Black agenda.

    https://www.vanguardngr.com/2020/06/...s-white-minds/
    Four days after The Washington Post published Senator Scott’s piece, it published another column on Steve King entitled: “Steve King says he was just defending ‘Western Civilization.’ That’s racist too.”
    In this piece, academics David Perry and Matthew Gabriele take apart the concept of “the West” and suggest it was created to “[explain] why white men ought to rule the world.” “Western Civilization, then, became the story of an unbroken genealogy that stretched from Greece to Rome to the Germanic tribes to the Renaissance to the contemporary, white world,” they write.
    Instead, Dr. Perry and Dr. Gabriele argue that there is no real “West,” only “many different Wests.” “[T]he real story embedded in the history of Western Civilization,” they claim, “is a tale of permeability, of movement and change.” They even go on to claim that Congressman King is akin to “Anders Breivik, Jeremey Christian and other neo-Vikings, and the racists who marched in Charlottesville” who “deploy this nostalgia for a mythical ‘West’” to “dominate the future.” “King’s defense of ‘Western Civilization,’” they write, simply does “that work more politely.”

    Their proposed solution is education: “Teaching the real story of the West — one that’s multiethnic, encompasses all genders, and takes account of both its horrors and its triumphs — will ensure that the Kings of the future will no longer be able to fall back on semantics to ensure their bigotry.” In other words, Western Civilization is now code for white supremacy.

    Western Civilization is white civilization. No one can credibly claim to “defend Western Civilization” without defending the people that created it. “To read about your own culture is a revolutionary act,” said Jonathan Bowden in one of his speeches. In today’s world, there is no greater act of rebellion — for whites — than to defend their own identity. To be a white person is to be heir of a tradition and culture that stretches from the Greco-Roman and Germanic civilizations of the past into the limitless horizons of a potentially glorious future. Yet that future will be ours only if we have the moral courage to defend our right to exist. That battle starts by claiming ownership of our own history.

    https://www.amren.com/commentary/201...-civilization/
    Five minutes ago we were all told there is no such thing as whiteness and to attach societal or cultural values to immutable racial characteristics is racist, which is correct. Now the Smithsonian joins a chorus of institutional voices saying “white culture” does exist, has been internalized by everyone per all these arbitrary racial value assignments, and should therefore be purged for the good of humanity. Amazing what can happen when the establishment decides it needs white supremacist talking points to whip non white votes. I wonder how long before Richard Spencer and Jared Taylor start writing BLM press releases.

    Ironically some socialists don’t seem to appreciate the “trained Marxists’” counterfactual marketing gimmick either, albeit for their own reasons, some of which I’ve raised myself.
    There are many scholars, students and workers who know that the 1619 Project makes a travesty of history. It is their responsibility to take a stand and reject the coordinated attempt, spearheaded by the Times, to dredge up and rehabilitate a reactionary race-based falsification of American and world history.

    Above all the working class must reject any such effort to divide it, efforts which will become ever more ferocious and pernicious as the class struggle develops. The great issue of this epoch is the fight for the international unity of the working class against all forms of racism, nationalism and related forms of identity politics.

    In the weeks and months to come, the World Socialist Web Site will publicize and report on lectures that will be organized by the International Youth and Students for Social Equality (IYSSE), in which the reactionary anti-working-class politics and historical falsifications promoted by the 1619 Project will be exposed.

    https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/201.../1619-s06.html
    Of these facts there cannot be any shadow of doubt: for instance, that civil society was renovated in every part by Christian institutions; that in the strength of that renewal the human race was lifted up to better things-nay, that it was brought back from death to life, and to so excellent a life that nothing more perfect had been known before, or will come to be known in the ages that have yet to be. - Pope Leo XIII

  13. #93
    Muizer's Avatar member 3519
    Patrician Artifex Magistrate

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    11,087

    Default Re: Smithsonian Group Museum Engages in... White... Supremacy?

    I still don't see how challenging a dominant culture and putting forward the idea that it may not be a universal truth/optimum, but just one amongst many amounts to a call to reject every aspect of, or even "purge" the dominant culture. Even if you have encountered people who say exactly that, surely that's no excuse to just stop considering whether parts of what they're saying make sense. That whole discussion seems to be continuously derailed by people who seem hell bent on not questioning their own preconceptions. And note that I say 'question' not 'abandon'. I'm not personally convinced the BLM theorists are on the right ideological track, but I'm not so cowardly as to jump on every opportunity to twist and distort their ideas.
    Last edited by Muizer; July 27, 2020 at 08:43 AM.
    "Lay these words to heart, Lucilius, that you may scorn the pleasure which comes from the applause of the majority. Many men praise you; but have you any reason for being pleased with yourself, if you are a person whom the many can understand?" - Lucius Annaeus Seneca -

  14. #94

    Default Re: Smithsonian Group Museum Engages in... White... Supremacy?

    Quoting articles and people stating what they believe tends to derail apologist modulations of racist narratives like the Smithsonian web series, that’s true sometimes. That doesn’t mean it’s counterproductive to do so. We are all obligated to stamp out racism, after all.
    Of these facts there cannot be any shadow of doubt: for instance, that civil society was renovated in every part by Christian institutions; that in the strength of that renewal the human race was lifted up to better things-nay, that it was brought back from death to life, and to so excellent a life that nothing more perfect had been known before, or will come to be known in the ages that have yet to be. - Pope Leo XIII

  15. #95

    Default Re: Smithsonian Group Museum Engages in... White... Supremacy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Legio_Italica View Post
    Quoting articles and people stating what they believe tends to derail apologist modulations of racist narratives like the Smithsonian web series, that’s true sometimes. That doesn’t mean it’s counterproductive to do so. We are all obligated to stamp out racism, after all.
    And it offers the opportunity to explain to the unquestioning derailers why it should be considered, what makes sense about it and have the pros and cons laid out.

  16. #96

    Default Re: Smithsonian Group Museum Engages in... White... Supremacy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Muizer View Post
    You know, I find the thesis that race inequality continues to exist as a result of a dominant, normative European culture worth exploring. However I also find this is sadly virtually impossible to do in the presence of those who either are seemingly unwilling (or unable?) to even consider that angle, as well as those who seem quite aware but actually think that is the way it should stay. What is the point of considering pros and cons of an idea with an audience that is deaf to one side of the argument? It makes both their support and criticism pointless. Their only merit is to serve as anecdotal evidence, as symptoms, of that which we should be discussing.
    It is impossible to have a rational discussion in the public sphere when such a large cleavage of the population considers such discussion as either racial pandering or an outright attack on their "values". Their thoroughly non-racist, non-nationalist, very inclusive values.

  17. #97

    Default Re: Smithsonian Group Museum Engages in... White... Supremacy?

    Quite right. In fact, before getting canceled by the woke mob, Abe Lincoln spoke to the anti-racist, nationalist, inclusive values near and dear to Americans.
    As a prominent Illinois Whig, Abraham Lincoln articulated the core ideas of an antislavery nationalism in his anti-Nebraska speeches in 1854. His speeches responded to passage of the Douglas-authored Kansas-Nebraska Act, which struck down the antislavery provisions of the Missouri Compromise and enabled settlers to legalize slavery in the territories of Kansas and Nebraska under the auspices of popular sovereignty. Considering popular sovereignty as Douglas defined it to be "despotism," Lincoln bitingly observed that Thomas Jefferson never conceived of "the liberty of making slaves of other people." Instead, Lincoln claimed that the founders had opposed slavery on principle and tolerated it only from necessity, placing them in opposition to Douglas, whose popular sovereignty policies treated slavery as a "moral right." By contending that the founders had opposed slavery, Lincoln took the same ground as Illinois' leading anti-Nebraska Democrat, Lyman Trumbull, and Illinois' leading political abolitionist, Ichabod Codding, thus illustrating an area of ideological accord that would later help to unify the disparate anti-Nebraska factions into the Republican Party. But Lincoln drew on the Declaration of Independence to condemn the Kansas-Nebraska Act far more than most anti-Nebraskites. He considered the revolutionaries' document to be the touchstone of human liberty because it rested on the proposition of human equality, which justified a government based on consent rather than force. By contrast, the presumption of human inequality justified the despotic subordination of people deemed inferior, as southern slavery demonstrated. Therefore Lincoln considered the founders' legacy to be the best antidote to Douglas's popular sovereignty. "If the negro is a man," he argued, "then my ancient faith teaches me that 'all men are created equal;' and that there can be no moral right in connection with one man's making a slave of another." To Lincoln, this moral idea justified American government and gave meaning to American nationalism. Consequently, he urged all Americans to "repurify" the nation's ideals by implementing the antislavery extension policies that harmonized with the Declaration of Independence. In doing so, Americans would "not only have saved the Union," but have made it "forever worthy of the saving." This was a position that Lincoln considered "no less than National" in 1854.

    In the 1856 campaign, Lincoln developed his antislavery conception of American nationalism by celebrating the superiority of free society. In 1854 he had briefly mentioned his desire to preserve the territories for "free white people," but in 1856 he tied the interests of free labor more explicitly to the ideals of free society. He attributed the nation's extraordinary "prosperity" to the "cause" that "every man can make himself," and he contended that "to give up that one thing, would be to give up all future prosperity." But Lincoln really referred to northern prosperity. His comparison of the northern and southern social systems led him to conclude that northerners had "an interest" in maintaining "the principles of the Government," and "without this interest" the government "is worth nothing." He reported to his northern audiences that southern newspapers, such as the Richmond Enquirer, claimed that "their slaves are far better off than Northern freemen." Lincoln ridiculed this idea because no fixed class of labor existed in the North. "The man who labored for another last year," he declared, "this year labors for himself, and next year he will hire others to labor for him." Lincoln therefore disdained any moral comparison between free and slave labor, or between free and slave society; in his estimation, no credible basis existed for the southern defense of slavery on "principle." Consequently, he urged northerners to keep "the Territories free for the settlement of free laborers" by defeating southern attempts to make slavery "a ruling element in our government." Lincoln had begun to conflate northern society and American nationalism.

    https://quod.lib.umich.edu/j/jala/26...;view=fulltext
    Though the Smithsonian may disapprove, Lincoln’s Christian norms were integral to the nationalist fervor that killed the institution of slavery in America.
    Of these facts there cannot be any shadow of doubt: for instance, that civil society was renovated in every part by Christian institutions; that in the strength of that renewal the human race was lifted up to better things-nay, that it was brought back from death to life, and to so excellent a life that nothing more perfect had been known before, or will come to be known in the ages that have yet to be. - Pope Leo XIII

  18. #98
    alhoon's Avatar Comes Rei Militaris
    Moderator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Chania, Greece
    Posts
    24,758

    Default Re: Smithsonian Group Museum Engages in... White... Supremacy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Love Mountain View Post
    It is impossible to have a rational discussion in the public sphere when such a large cleavage of the population considers such discussion as either racial pandering or an outright attack on their "values". Their thoroughly non-racist, non-nationalist, very inclusive values.
    Quote Originally Posted by Legio_Italica View Post
    Quite right. In fact, before getting canceled by the woke mob, Abe Lincoln spoke to the anti-racist, nationalist, inclusive values near and dear to Americans.

    Though the Smithsonian may disapprove, Lincoln’s Christian norms were integral to the nationalist fervor that killed the institution of slavery in America.
    LI is right.
    alhoon is not a member of the infamous Hoons: a (fictional) nazi-sympathizer KKK clan. Of course, no Hoon would openly admit affiliation to the uninitiated.
    "Angry Uncle Gordon" describes me well.
    _______________________________________________________
    Beta-tester for Darthmod Empire, the default modification for Empire Total War that does not ask for your money behind patreon.
    Developer of Causa Belli submod for Darthmod, headed by Hammeredalways and a ton of other people.
    Developer of LtC: Random maps submod for Lands to Conquer (that brings a multitude of random maps and other features).

  19. #99

    Default Re: Smithsonian Group Museum Engages in... White... Supremacy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Muizer View Post
    I still don't see how challenging a dominant culture and putting forward the idea that it may not be a universal truth/optimum, but just one amongst many amounts to a call to reject every aspect of, or even "purge" the dominant culture. Even if you have encountered people who say exactly that, surely that's no excuse to just stop considering whether parts of what they're saying make sense. That whole discussion seems to be continuously derailed by people who seem hell bent on not questioning their own preconceptions. And note that I say 'question' not 'abandon'. I'm not personally convinced the BLM theorists are on the right ideological track, but I'm not so cowardly as to jump on every opportunity to twist and distort their ideas.
    You aren't challenging the "dominant culture". You're part of it. There's a reason why BLM's narrative is regurgitated ad nauseam by corporate America, the cosmopolitan press, the entertainment industry and academia. The Washington elite literally kneel for it.

    Debating the criminal justice system, police reform or the leading causes of African American mortality was never the objective. The priority for the liberal establishment and their activists has been to launch irrational, hyper-critical attacks against "whiteness" (itself a term typically used as a racial pejorative), American icons and various western institutions. So instead of discussing the substantive issues and consensus building (which might actually threaten the status quo) we've been dragged into another one of the left's poisonous culture wars, complete with riots, looting, vandalism and other forms of violence.
    Last edited by Cope; July 28, 2020 at 03:49 AM.



  20. #100

    Default Re: Smithsonian Group Museum Engages in... White... Supremacy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Legio_Italica View Post
    Quite right. In fact, before getting canceled by the woke mob, Abe Lincoln spoke to the anti-racist, nationalist, inclusive values near and dear to Americans.
    Abraham Lincoln was quite content with battling slavery through political and legal means, while allowing slavery to exist in the South. Lincoln was a pragmatist, despite being a fierce abolitionist, and on the topic of Founding Fathers, the majority of them were slaveholders and the final founding documents of United States purposefully allowed slavery to continue. So despite the lack of academic rigor in the selection of targets by the "woke mob". There is nothing wrong with re-examining history and our political attitude when it comes to discrimination in this country. There is a reason why the New York Times 1619 project, is dated 1619 rather than other significant dates like 1776 or 1788.

    Though the Smithsonian may disapprove, Lincoln’s Christian norms were integral to the nationalist fervor that killed the institution of slavery in America.
    Considering other ugly consequences of nationalist fervor, such as the genocide of native americans, american imperialism, KKK, and Manifest Destiny, it is perhaps quite appropriate for the Smithsonian to disapprove.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cope View Post
    You aren't challenging the "dominant culture". You're part of it. There's a reason why BLM's narrative is regurgitated ad nauseam by corporate America, the cosmopolitan press, the entertainment industry and academia. The Washington elite literally kneel for it.

    Debating the criminal justice system, police reform or the leading causes of African American mortality was never the objective. The priority for the liberal establishment and their activists has been to launch irrational, hyper-critical attacks against "whiteness" (itself a term typically used as a racial pejorative), American icons and various western institutions. So instead of discussing the substantive issues and consensus building (which might actually threaten the status quo) we've been dragged into another one of the left's poisonous culture wars, complete with riots, looting, vandalism and other forms of violence.
    The fact that "hyper-critical" attacks on "whiteness" are not a negative thing. Especially as such discourse is not an attack on White people or American cultural norms despite such a large segment of the population viewing it as such. Rather, it is a criticism of the current hierarchy reflected in government institutions. It is substantive, in fact it is vital to actually realize the notion that America is "the least racist country in the world".

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •