BF2S Forums The MLK monument is a national disgrace imo

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

lowing wrote:

Jay wrote:

Let's be real here. For over one hundred years after slavery ended, white people, especially in the south, but also in places like NYC, attempted to marginalize black people and exclude them from white society. It's why there was segregation, and Jim Crow laws, and laws against mixed marriages. Now, after being forced to live apart and develop their own culture over that one hundred year period, you expect them to suddenly integrate within a single lifespan? Please. Fifty years ago it didn't matter how 'white' they acted or how hard they tried to integrate, it just wasn't going to happen. So kindly step off with your 'one nation' bullshit rhetoric.

I guess you missed the part where I said one history the good the bad and the ugly. Regardless, like it or not, theres is only one American history. and the path of that history has lead us to where we are today as a nation, (for better or worse)

Lowing, American history is the sum of its threads. One of these happens to be black history. Black history month lopsided focus on one aspect of American history, which I think is a little on the patronizing side if nothing else.

There is black history in America the same way as there are different culture groups in America. To deny all that and claim that America has one overriding personality and background is just silly.

Last edited by lowing (2011-08-27 11:39:48)

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

Who cares that it was built by Chinese people or designed by a Chinese artist or that the King family got paid?  Workers got exploited, and it's another instance of government mismanagement of money.  There's so many other incidents of monetary indiscretion, mismanagement of funds, graft, corruption  and cronyism in the government and you choose an $800k statue built using the classic American technique of importing and exploiting immigrants to bitch about?

Oh yeah, and the statue IS ugly.

lowing wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

I'm afraid you're wrong. American history is like a woven tapestry of people and events. Black history may be only one of the many threads that make it up, but it is still there and is a significant one at that. Not so significant that I think it bears deadpan repetition every February, but there nonetheless.

History as it is taught (in public schools) nowadays is fairly shoddy and incomplete. Without reading on your own, you're barely going to be exposed to it in much detail. Improve that and incorporate "black history" into a higher-resolution curriculum, I say.

(last edit for context; gotta go pick someone up)

no you are wrong. "black history" alone makes no sense without the surrounding people and events that shaped "black history". It does not stand alone.

lowing wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

I'm afraid you're wrong. American history is like a woven tapestry of people and events. Black history may be only one of the many threads that make it up, but it is still there and is a significant one at that. Not so significant that I think it bears deadpan repetition every February, but there nonetheless.

History as it is taught (in public schools) nowadays is fairly shoddy and incomplete. Without reading on your own, you're barely going to be exposed to it in much detail. Improve that and incorporate "black history" into a higher-resolution curriculum, I say.

(last edit for context; gotta go pick someone up)

no you are wrong. "black history" alone makes no sense without the surrounding people and events that shaped "black history". It does not stand alone.

As I said:
if it were black history then that would include all blacks in every country, of every religion, in every era, and that is not what what is recognized as black history month in the US.  you can not talk about the blacks in our country solely without the context of what was happening in America at the time, that includes the rest of us. Sorry you are dead wrong. No such thing as black history.

It is American history. The end.

-Sh1fty- wrote:

lowing wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

I'm afraid you're wrong. American history is like a woven tapestry of people and events. Black history may be only one of the many threads that make it up, but it is still there and is a significant one at that. Not so significant that I think it bears deadpan repetition every February, but there nonetheless.

History as it is taught (in public schools) nowadays is fairly shoddy and incomplete. Without reading on your own, you're barely going to be exposed to it in much detail. Improve that and incorporate "black history" into a higher-resolution curriculum, I say.

(last edit for context; gotta go pick someone up)

no you are wrong. "black history" alone makes no sense without the surrounding people and events that shaped "black history". It does not stand alone.

That's very well put. Without the encompassing people and elements you cannot get the full picture. By studying all these factors it's no longer black history but american history.

lowing wrote:

Jay wrote:

You want black people to be marginalized from the history books just like they were from the rest of society for over one hundred years. Got it lowing.

How about you read back to ANYTHING I have said and explain to me what you draw that conclusion from?

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

lowing wrote:

exactly.

Not exactly. This is all being grossly misunderstood. Black history is both black history and American history. The two are indivisible.

Using your approach, I could say that studying the events before and during the American Civil War specific to it is invalid because it's American history. The trees make up the forest, lowing, there's no way around it...and there are too many of them to accurately describe the forest all in one course. There are a lot of aspects of American history to specifically study. Black history receives more specific attention than I think it deserves anymore (lol black history month), but it's still a valid topic of study, should be taught to some extent and can lead people to studying the history of maltreatment of other ethnic minorities in America.

"black history" alone makes no sense without the surrounding people and events that shaped "black history"

That IS black history. It is a part of American history.

Last edited by coke (2011-08-27 12:40:59)

Miggle wrote:

what are you lot even arguing about? whether the history of black people in america can be called black history?

what the fuck am I reading?

what the fuck is wrong with DST?

Last edited by coke (2011-08-27 12:43:03)

lowing wrote:

Jay wrote:

lowing wrote:

How about you read back to ANYTHING I have said and explain to me what you draw that conclusion from?

You never say anything directly, you always hint around it, because damn, you don't want to be accused of racism now do you? I know your sources, and I know what they are really saying, even if you do not.

Tell me, what source do you speak of? I get accused of racism all the time by dipshits like you, problem is, you can never back your accusations up with fact.

Jay wrote:

lowing wrote:

Jay wrote:

You never say anything directly, you always hint around it, because damn, you don't want to be accused of racism now do you? I know your sources, and I know what they are really saying, even if you do not.

Tell me, what source do you speak of? I get accused of racism all the time by dipshits like you, problem is, you can never back your accusations up with fact.

http://www.davidduke.com/

Last edited by lowing (2011-08-27 19:27:15)

coke wrote:

lowing wrote:

coke wrote:

Racist people getting agitated 'cus they believe that black people shouldn't have their own slice of American history, even though it's simply a label for an area of study.

I have no problem with the study of American history and the contributions made by all Americans to that history. But you simply can not discuss the civil rights movement and those involved without discussing the course of action that drove it to existence. and that is American history. Not some special consideration footnote. We are all Americans and our past is as one nation.

No one told me how we could discuss white history without discussing how white people fucked over everyone else. So how can we discuss a single thread in a tapestry of history without discussing the tapestry itself? You can't.

Seriously what the fuck are you on about, "black history" is simply a "module" of American history like all the others that make it up. Each of which can be studied individually/specifically, and yet at the same time they will all still look at their wider context within history as a whole.