Destruction and theft of cultural heritage

[TheDeamon]

Academics dispute whether this should be treated as deliberate. While there were actual food shortages, they did export food. I stand corrected on the freedom part, though. I didn't know that the Ukrainians were prevented from emigrating.

In the case of Ukraine, the Food Exports are what caused the famine

[DJQuag]

ITT-

Liberals defend past Russian atrocities.

[TheDrake]

I'm not a liberal, and I'm not about to defend Stalin. Everything about him was the worst of humanity. I was just responding to the specific claim of Stalin VS Hitler.

[Pete at Home]

I believe Dquag was speaking of the sources you referred to;  not to you.

[Seriati]

“He put those ghastly gray pioneers literally walking over the dead body of an Indian to demonstrate that the settlement of the west was an act of conquest that involved the slaughter of Native Americans,” Cherny said at a 2018 Board of Education meeting. “That was a very bold effort on his part to counter the kinds of textbooks that students were seeing.”

I might not want to see a mural that depicts genocide every day either.

You wouldn't want a reminder that even our heros did things that are atrocious by modern standards?  When you white wash history to eliminate the reminders of the bad, you set up a future that can idolize those times without having learned the lessons of history. 

To put it another way, if you eliminate the reminders of what you label a genocide in the conquest of the west, you then allow an entire generation to arise that doesn't see any risks from those policies.

[TheDrake]

As a teenager I wouldn't want to walk by it several times a day on my way to class, no.

I also wouldn't put up depictions of Auschwitz in a school hallway in Berlin either. That wouldn't mean forgetting anything, or whitewashing it. I would expect plenty of class material on the reality of such terrible events, including the treatment of indigenous people.

You also have to recognize that most of the works are an homage to Washington, you'd have to be an unusually observant teen to pick up on the difference between glorifying the slaughter of Indians and criticizing it based on the color palette used to depict those colonists.

There's a fine line between a reminder and shaming people whose ancestors committed such acts, or enraging people whose ancestors were the victims of such acts.

[TheDrake]

With respect to the famine in Ukraine, I've done a lot more reading and I no longer think there is much doubt about what Stalin was up to. I drop my original objection and will go with Stalin > Hitler, for what it is worth.

It's one of the things I like about this group, it prompts me to learn things I probably never would have known otherwise.

[Crunch]

You might have a point, if it weren't for facts.

Have a look at the murals

This isn't Washington crossing the Delaware.

“He put those ghastly gray pioneers literally walking over the dead body of an Indian to demonstrate that the settlement of the west was an act of conquest that involved the slaughter of Native Americans,” Cherny said at a 2018 Board of Education meeting. “That was a very bold effort on his part to counter the kinds of textbooks that students were seeing.”

I might not want to see a mural that depicts genocide every day either.

Feel free to return to your hysteria over the imminent loss of George Washington from our  museums, historical sites, textbooks, and collective memory. I know by now that I can't stop you.

How about Jefferson and , well, everything:

Pete Buttigieg, who is running in a crowded Democratic field for president, said on Friday he believes renaming events and things named after President Thomas Jefferson is the “right thing to do.”

The South Bend mayor appeared on The Hugh Hewitt Show, where he was asked to weigh in on the name of the annual Indiana Democratic dinner, which was formerly named after party founders and former presidents Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson. Indiana Democrats changed the name of the annual dinner in 2016…

“Yeah, we’re doing that in Indiana. I think it’s the right thing to do,” Buttigieg said. “Over time, you develop and evolve on the things you choose to honor … Jefferson is more problematic. There’s a lot of course to admire in his thinking and his philosophy, but then again if you plunge into his writings, especially the notes on the state of Virginia, you know that he knew slavery was wrong.”

Anything and everything Thomas Jefferson, gotta go. Call it hystera if that makes you feel better, but we all know better.

[TheDrake]

Jefferson - plagiarized most of the Declaration of Independence, failed to prepare Virginia military defenses resulting in his abandonment of the State.

John Quincy Adams called him a shirker and a coward.

Obviously not everything is negative. He did abolish the slave trade, thereby ending slave ships from Africa. The Louisiana purchase was a stroke of genius.

I would be bothered if the Library of Congress changed the name of the Thomas Jefferson Building since he directly contributed his personal library to its reconstruction.

I'm not sure how you get from "an annual Indiana Democratic dinner" to "anything and everything". It's very Trumpian though to treat a molehill as a mountain. Let's go the actual question though, shall we? I've added emphasis to make things more clear.

This is the actual context of Buttigieg's statements

Hewitt: Let’s go to policy now. A very blunt question, because you talk about going to every Jefferson-Jackson dinner in Indiana when you were running statewide. Should Jefferson-Jackson dinners be renamed everywhere because both were holders of slaves?

Buttigieg: Yeah, we’re doing that in Indiana. I think it’s the right thing to do. You know, over time, you develop and evolve on the things you choose to honor. And I think we know enough, especially Jackson, you know, you just look at what basically amounts to genocide that happened here. Jefferson’s more problematic. You know, there’s a lot to, of course, admire in his thinking and his philosophy. Then again, as you plunge into his writings, especially the notes on the state of Virginia, you know that he knew that slavery was wrong.

Hewitt: Yes.

Buttigieg: And yet, he did it. Now we’re all morally conflicted human beings. And it’s not like we’re blotting him out of the history books, or deleting him from being the founder fathers. But you know, naming something after somebody confers a certain amount of honor. And at a time, I mean, the real reason I think there’s a lot of pressure on this is the relationship between the past and the present, that we’re finding in a million different ways that racism isn’t some curiosity out of the past that we’re embarrassed about but moved on from. It’s alive, it’s well, it’s hurting people. And it’s one of the main reasons to be in politics today is to try to change or reverse the harms that went along with that. Then, we’d better look for ways to live out and honor that principle, even in a symbolic thing.

[TheDeamon]

Jefferson is a complex man and makes for a complex topic.

Andrew Jackson can be purged freely, about the only good thing about him is his role as a war hero. There isn't much else about that guy to warrant celebrating.

[Crunch]

So is Martin Luther King, you want to strip him from all public view?

[Pete at Home]

 

So is Martin Luther King,

What's your antecedent? MLK a war hero?

Are Lenin statues in Prague "cultural heritage"?

How about confederate flag toilet paper? Cultural, racist or both? I love some of the one star comments.


https://www.amazon.com/America-Flag-Toilet-Paper-Pattern/product-reviews/B00Q4IIF22
This is just wrong. What's the difference between wiping and burning the flag?" serious. Someone actually posted that.

[Crunch]

Secret FBI tapes that accuse Martin Luther King Jr of having extramarital affairs with '40 to 45 women' and even claim he 'looked on and laughed' as a pastor friend raped a parishioner exist, an author has claimed.

The civil rights hero was also heard allegedly joking he was the founder of the 'International Association for the Advancement of P***y-Eaters' on an agency recording that was obtained by bugging his room, according to the sensational claims made by biographer David Garrow - a Pullitzer prize-winning author and biographer of MLK.

The recording from the Willard Hotel near the White House shows how King was accompanied his friend Logan Kearse, the pastor of Baltimore's Cornerstone Baptist church who died in 1991, along with several female parishioners of his church.

In King's hotel room, the files claim they then 'discussed which women among the parishioners would be suitable for natural and unnatural sex acts'.

The FBI document says: 'When one of the women protested that she did not approve, the Baptist minister immediately and forcefully raped her' as King watched.

He is alleged to have 'looked on, laugh and offered advice' during the encounter.

FBI agents were in the room next door but did not intervene.

The following day, King and a dozen others allegedly participated in a 'sex orgy' engaging in 'acts of degeneracy and depravity'.

Alright, we’re tearing down everything MLK right? Sure, he can stay in history books but statues gotta go, schools renamed, wiped from the public view except for a museum or something. Everyone agrees I’m sure. Right?

[Pete at Home]

Secret FBI tapes that accuse Martin Luther King Jr of having extramarital affairs with '40 to 45 women' and even claim he 'looked on and laughed' as a pastor friend raped a parishioner exist, an author has claimed.

The civil rights hero was also heard allegedly joking he was the founder of the 'International Association for the Advancement of P***y-Eaters' on an agency recording that was obtained by bugging his room, according to the sensational claims made by biographer David Garrow - a Pullitzer prize-winning author and biographer of MLK.

The recording from the Willard Hotel near the White House shows how King was accompanied his friend Logan Kearse, the pastor of Baltimore's Cornerstone Baptist church who died in 1991, along with several female parishioners of his church.

In King's hotel room, the files claim they then 'discussed which women among the parishioners would be suitable for natural and unnatural sex acts'.

The FBI document says: 'When one of the women protested that she did not approve, the Baptist minister immediately and forcefully raped her' as King watched.

He is alleged to have 'looked on, laugh and offered advice' during the encounter.

FBI agents were in the room next door but did not intervene.

The following day, King and a dozen others allegedly participated in a 'sex orgy' engaging in 'acts of degeneracy and depravity'.

Alright, we’re tearing down everything MLK right? Sure, he can stay in history books but statues gotta go, schools renamed, wiped from the public view except for a museum or something. Everyone agrees I’m sure. Right?

Quite honestly, the FBI's involvement with sexing up MLK is precisely why Donald Trump's enemies in the Media-FBICIA complex scare me even more than Trump scares me. That's what it means to me to be a liberal.

[Crunch]

YouTube announced new rules around hate speech on Wednesday that prohibit videos promoting Nazi ideology or denying the existence of the Holocaust or other well-documented violent events like the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School. Thousands of channels are expected to be shut down. But now multiple teachers are complaining that videos uploaded to educate people about Nazi history have been deleted...

Slaveowners were bad and we must remove all trace of them from the public view. The Nazis were bad. Following the logic, shouldn't we be removing everything we can of the Nazis? Wouldn't the world be better if we never even knew they existed?

[D.W.]

You make an excellent point.  I wasn't aware that stuff like civil war monuments and all these slave owner's names on buildings were intended as a cautionary tale.  Truly enlightened and civically minded sculptors and institutions naming their buildings and places.

[TheDrake]

Binary Crunch can't tell the difference between a statue in the town square and a historical reference material.

[Pete at Home]

Secret FBI tapes that accuse Martin Luther King Jr of having extramarital affairs with '40 to 45 women' and even claim he 'looked on and laughed' as a pastor friend raped a parishioner exist, an author has claimed.

The civil rights hero was also heard allegedly joking he was the founder of the 'International Association for the Advancement of P***y-Eaters' on an agency recording that was obtained by bugging his room, according to the sensational claims made by biographer David Garrow - a Pullitzer prize-winning author and biographer of MLK.

The recording from the Willard Hotel near the White House shows how King was accompanied his friend Logan Kearse, the pastor of Baltimore's Cornerstone Baptist church who died in 1991, along with several female parishioners of his church.

In King's hotel room, the files claim they then 'discussed which women among the parishioners would be suitable for natural and unnatural sex acts'.

The FBI document says: 'When one of the women protested that she did not approve, the Baptist minister immediately and forcefully raped her' as King watched.

He is alleged to have 'looked on, laugh and offered advice' during the encounter.

FBI agents were in the room next door but did not intervene.

The following day, King and a dozen others allegedly participated in a 'sex orgy' engaging in 'acts of degeneracy and depravity'.

Alright, we’re tearing down everything MLK right?

Based on your rumor of an FBI tape somewhere?

Trusting the FBI on MLK? You are desperate.

Slaveowners were bad and we must remove all trace of them from the public view. T

No one said erase every trace of them.  The argument is don't sponsor their propaganda about themselves in the public square.

If the confeds had left us anything as useful as the Nazis had (Freeways and Volkswagen beetles) then wed leave that up. But early 20th century apologetics and propagandistic attempts to rewrite history do not constitute a culture that deserves yet more tax dollars to perpetuate.

 

[Crunch]

You make an excellent point.  I wasn't aware that stuff like civil war monuments and all these slave owner's names on buildings were intended as a cautionary tale.  Truly enlightened and civically minded sculptors and institutions naming their buildings and places.

So you're thinking there are limits? Maybe some guidelines as to what is objectionable to remove from society's eyes and what is not? Is there a manual?

[TheDeamon]

YouTube announced new rules around hate speech on Wednesday that prohibit videos promoting Nazi ideology or denying the existence of the Holocaust or other well-documented violent events like the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School. Thousands of channels are expected to be shut down. But now multiple teachers are complaining that videos uploaded to educate people about Nazi history have been deleted...

Slaveowners were bad and we must remove all trace of them from the public view. The Nazis were bad. Following the logic, shouldn't we be removing everything we can of the Nazis? Wouldn't the world be better if we never even knew they existed?

That would be in line with the complaints from teachers. The YouTube policy summary is kind of funny in many respects.

1) You cannot deny ____ Events occured.
2) You cannot use materials related to events mentioned in item #1 because they can be considered as promotion of such activities.

[NobleHunter]

That would be in line with the complaints from teachers. The YouTube policy summary is kind of funny in many respects.

1) You cannot deny ____ Events occured.
2) You cannot use materials related to events mentioned in item #1 because they can be considered as promotion of such activities.

To apply Crunchian logic to the situation, YouTube is probably trying to a bad enough job at censoring Nazis that people decide it can't be done. That way they can keep that sweet white supremacy ad money.

[Pete at Home]

To apply *my* logic, the whole reason for the Nazi microRennaisance was the clumsy heavy handed and misguided attempt to censor non progressive opinion.

[TheDrake]

To apply *my* logic, the whole reason for the Nazi microRennaisance was the clumsy heavy handed and misguided attempt to censor non progressive opinion.

So because people can't watch Alex Jones rant on facebook (while still being perfectly capable of going to his website and watch his rants), they started collecting Third Reich artifacts?

[Fenring]

To apply *my* logic, the whole reason for the Nazi microRennaisance was the clumsy heavy handed and misguided attempt to censor non progressive opinion.

So because people can't watch Alex Jones rant on facebook (while still being perfectly capable of going to his website and watch his rants), they started collecting Third Reich artifacts?

 

[ScottF]

To apply *my* logic, the whole reason for the Nazi microRennaisance was the clumsy heavy handed and misguided attempt to censor non progressive opinion.

So because people can't watch Alex Jones rant on facebook (while still being perfectly capable of going to his website and watch his rants), they started collecting Third Reich artifacts?

I think what he means is that nothing legitimizes people with kooky/conspiracist ideas more than seeing the powers that be attempt to silence them. But you knew that.

[Fenring]

I think what he means is that nothing legitimizes people with kooky/conspiracist ideas more than seeing the powers that be attempt to silence them. But you knew that.

Actually I took it to be more general than that, but Pete can say exactly which things he did or didn't imply. I sort of took it to mean that the general populace not 'on the side' of political correctness is going to feel the squeeze and will be upset by it to differing degrees. When this happens, the extremes at the end of the spectrum are going to be *upset enough* to form extreme opinions about it, or to be subject to radicalization, and the tiny extremist groups will begin sounding to them like they make sense.

Or maybe it has something to do with the fact that the tiny extremist group is suddenly getting lots of press (and therefore advertising) as a result of new crusades to 'do something' about them. Even if they got no new members out of this they nevertheless gain anti-prestige, which makes them look larger than life. That's a media funhouse-mirror thing more so than even a cultural thing.

[TheDrake]

I think what he means is that nothing legitimizes people with kooky/conspiracist ideas more than seeing the powers that be attempt to silence them. But you knew that.

I think they are more legitimized by having the powers that be support them outright or by not denouncing them. I do acknowledge that they are more likely to act out when they perceive they are under siege, and that some portion of them may become radicalized. I don't think that's the driving factor.

Pete characterizes the banning of the white nationalist message as misguided. I think it is misguided to turn a blind eye to this, and tacitly support the spread of that message.

[Fenring]

I think they are more legitimized by having the powers that be support them outright or by not denouncing them.

Are you referring to the "Trump would not denounce them" meme again?

[TheDrake]

Over and over again. But not one event, many. Starting with David Duke and moving on from there.

[Fenring]

Over and over again. But not one event, many. Starting with David Duke and moving on from there.

But didn't we debunk that Trump 'never denounced them'?

[TheDrake]

On that one incident in Charlottesville, I'll allow it. I still think the entire message should have condemned the organizers of the rally in the first place. Full stop. We can rehash the whole thing over again, but there are the people who think Trump doesn't do enough and those who think he is unfairly criticized. I think it is quite clear that no matter what he is doing or why, white supremacists are being encouraged by it.

[Fenring]

I still think the entire message should have condemned the organizers of the rally in the first place. Full stop.

You mean that every time someone holds a public gathering in support of a topic you think is bad, the President should personally get on the air an denounce them?

We can rehash the whole thing over again, but there are the people who think Trump doesn't do enough and those who think he is unfairly criticized. I think it is quite clear that no matter what he is doing or why, white supremacists are being encouraged by it.

I see how one could have this opinion. But your reply to Pete seems to have entirely missed his actual point, which is that the encouragement isn't coming from the office of the President but rather from those who are overzealously trying to go after 'the Nazis'. Your answer of "boo hoo Alex Jones" seemed to misunderstand (at least as Scott and I took it) his post.

[TheDeamon]

On that one incident in Charlottesville, I'll allow it. I still think the entire message should have condemned the organizers of the rally in the first place. Full stop. We can rehash the whole thing over again, but there are the people who think Trump doesn't do enough and those who think he is unfairly criticized. I think it is quite clear that no matter what he is doing or why, white supremacists are being encouraged by it.

Best approach is to ignore them, putting them in circumstances where they're impossible to ignore just furthers their cause.

[TheDeamon]

I see how one could have this opinion. But your reply to Pete seems to have entirely missed his actual point, which is that the encouragement isn't coming from the office of the President but rather from those who are overzealously trying to go after 'the Nazis'. Your answer of "boo hoo Alex Jones" seemed to misunderstand (at least as Scott and I took it) his post.

It is how I understood it as well.

The best way to lend credence to a tin-foil hat conspiracy is for "the big guns" within society to start taking pot-shots at the crazies. It just provides the crazies with more grounds to claim they're right.

Yes, you can address the issues they bring up(such as anti-vaxxer stuff), but at all costs, you ignore the messenger.

[TheDrake]

to be clear Pete said:

To apply *my* logic, the whole reason for the Nazi microRennaisance was the clumsy heavy handed and misguided attempt to censor non progressive opinion.

I am rejecting that this is either the "whole reason" or even the biggest reason for such a resurgence, that it could have been avoided if we just kept from banning people engaging in hate speech like Alex Jones and all the rest.

[TheDeamon]

to be clear Pete said:

To apply *my* logic, the whole reason for the Nazi microRennaisance was the clumsy heavy handed and misguided attempt to censor non progressive opinion.

I am rejecting that this is either the "whole reason" or even the biggest reason for such a resurgence, that it could have been avoided if we just kept from banning people engaging in hate speech like Alex Jones and all the rest.

Thing is, they didn't stop at Alex Jones. And reality is, he makes a decent benchmark unfortunately. If they're not censoring him, anybody more mainstream than he is should be safe as well.

It's the over-reach which is causing the problems.

[Fenring]

to be clear Pete said:

To apply *my* logic, the whole reason for the Nazi microRennaisance was the clumsy heavy handed and misguided attempt to censor non progressive opinion.

I am rejecting that this is either the "whole reason" or even the biggest reason for such a resurgence, that it could have been avoided if we just kept from banning people engaging in hate speech like Alex Jones and all the rest.

Alex Jones is the one they've taken legal steps to censor (at least on "private" platforms), but he is by no means the prime example of the kind of censorship that I think Pete's referring to. Censorship doesn't have to come from government, and as we're learning, threats to liberty are at least as likely to come laterally instead of hierarchically.

[DJQuag]

In what way do you think privately owned communication systems should be controlled by the government so that "censorship" doesn't happen?

Also, I heard NAMBLA is wanting to take an add out in the New York Times, full spread. Guess it would be immoral censorship if they denied it.

I mean...I'll be honest, I'm not sure where you're coming from here. If you're just saying we should frown and wag our fingers, I understand that even if I disagree. If you're saying this becoming something government should touch on, I absolutely don't.

[DJQuag]

These are private companies. If you all are so worked up, encourage the government to set aside money to set up the servers for those poor downtrodden people to be idiots on.

[ScottF]

I believe they will soon be regulated. The die was cast the moment they became content publishers vs open platforms. The key difference being an open platform would allow anything that wasn't actually illegal.

[Pete at Home]

to be clear Pete said:

To apply *my* logic, the whole reason for the Nazi microRennaisance was the clumsy heavy handed and misguided attempt to censor non progressive opinion.

I am rejecting that this is either the "whole reason" or even the biggest reason for such a resurgence, that it could have been avoided if we just kept from banning people engaging in hate speech like Alex Jones and all the rest.

The Drake translates my "non progressive opinion" into "Alex Jones."         this sort of bs misrepresentation, on a massive scale, of anyone who stands up to progressive "Silver Chair" style institutional gaslighting, is censorship by obfuscation. Even though I've been here over a decade without promoting Alex Jones types Drake presumes that anyone at odds with progressive institutional gaslighting must be for Alex Jones. This is classic sophistry. And this is the environment which birthed the Nazi micro-rennaisance.

What sort of fool thinks that burning books harms Nazism more than fomenting it?

[TheDrake]

Pick your favorite poster child, Pete. I have yet to see someone kicked off platforms that didn't deserve it. You can say non progressive all you like, but it's a much smaller subset that are violating their toc. Mike pence, focus on the family, and Paul Ryan are all non progressive who are not losing any access. Not allowing them on your platform is not equivalent to book burning. Anybody who wants to see that content can do so. It still is not the only or primary cause of the alt right resurgence.

I wonder if anyone here would object to kicking someone off ornery for using racial slurs?

[Crunch]

We continue, HBO Max Removes Civil War Epic 'Gone With the Wind'

Long considered controversial for its depiction of Black people and its positive view of slavery, Gone With the Wind faced renewed scrutiny after an op-ed by 12 Years A Slave screenwriter John Ridley published in the Los Angeles Times on Tuesday. In the op-ed, Ridley called on HBO Max to "consider removing" Gone With the Wind from its platform as the film had its "own unique problem." "It doesn’t just “fall short” with regard to representation. It is a film that glorifies the antebellum south. It is a film that, when it is not ignoring the horrors of slavery, pauses only to perpetuate some of the most painful stereotypes of people of color," Ridley wrote.

The books are still out there, better burn them.

[Kasandra]

They could be replaced with copies of "The Clansman" by Dixon.  Same thing, really.

So Much Love!

[Crunch]

Hattie Mcdaniel, actress in Gone With The Wind, was the first black person to win an academy award. Why don’t you go write a similar smarmy comment on her tombstone? smh

[Kasandra]

More smarmalade.

[Crunch]

Apparently from last year:

The US Association for Library Service to Children (ALSC) has removed Laura Ingalls Wilder’s name from one of its awards over racist views and language.

The association had received complaints for years over the Little House on the Prairie author’s “anti-Native and anti-Black sentiments in her work”.

The ALSC board voted unanimously on Saturday to remove Wilder’s name from the children’s literature award.

The medal will be renamed as the Children’s Literature Legacy award.

The ALSC, a division of the American Library Association, said Wilder’s novels and “expressions of stereotypical attitudes” were “inconsistent with ALSC’s core values”.

Wilder’s children’s novels about pioneer life in the American West have been criticised for language that dehumanises indigenous peoples and people of colour.

Yeah, gotta get rid of Wilder and her terrible stories. After that, Mark Twain gotta go! I can believe he hasn't already been canceled. In fact, pretty much everything written pre-1990 is not going to be woke enough for modern standards so there probably needs to be a real culling of literature. Movies too.

I think you're all on board with this, aren't you?

[DonaldD]

We continue, HBO Max Removes Civil War Epic 'Gone With the Wind'

Long considered controversial for its depiction of Black people and its positive view of slavery, Gone With the Wind faced renewed scrutiny after an op-ed by 12 Years A Slave screenwriter John Ridley published in the Los Angeles Times on Tuesday. In the op-ed, Ridley called on HBO Max to "consider removing" Gone With the Wind from its platform as the film had its "own unique problem." "It doesn’t just “fall short” with regard to representation. It is a film that glorifies the antebellum south. It is a film that, when it is not ignoring the horrors of slavery, pauses only to perpetuate some of the most painful stereotypes of people of color," Ridley wrote.

The books are still out there, better burn them.

Yes, it truly sucks that you cannot get this particular serving of cultural racism immediately on HBO Max, and will have to wait until it returns to HBO Max "with a discussion of its historical context and a denouncement of those very depictions"

[Crunch]

Cultural racism? What's that? Can you define it so I know what we need to cancel next?

[DonaldD]

define smarmy