T Nation

Democrats Favorite Word is Hate

If you’re not left you’re a hate group.

If you’re not left you must be intolerant.

The notion that there is a “War on Women”, that conservatives are in favor of dirty water and dirty air because we don’t wish to drive a golf-cart with a windmill on it’s top down interstate highways or that we hate gays and blacks is as big a lie as Russians living in a free society.

If I hear another liberal “Binders Full of Women” comment from the “Re-elct Obama headquarters of MSNBC, CNN, CBS, ABC, & NBC” I will literally travel to states where voter ID’s are not required just to vote another 100X for my candidates.

Gun control, abortion and the changing of all holiday names so as not to offend is what they think about right before falling asleep.

Let’s take history for example. As I write liberal educators already have in the works separate history courses to highlight African American, homosexual and transgender accomplishments so as not to make any feel less important. We are no longer a melting pot when liberals make those changes. How about just plain human American history?

It is a double edged sword. Be careful what you wish for liberals. You have awakened a sleeping giant. I don’t believe you will enjoy the Black History Month name change to Wintery Minority Something.

P.S.

Don’t discriminate against me.

I’m an unprotected minority and have been ridiculed laughed at and pointed out by crowds of people when I just want to be left alone. I didn’t chose to be the way I am. I can’t help it and it’s natural.

I am a booger eater.

I’ve been fired from jobs when employers find out. I’ve even been beaten up because another person didn’t understand about eating boogers and it made them uneasy. That shouldn’t be my problem, it’s their problem. They are close minded.

I love eating the bloody boogers the most. But I will eat any booger, it’s none of your business. If I choose to eat boogers in public I shouldn’t be made to feel different. Does that gross you out? That’s your problem, because I’m not going anywhere.

Don’t single me out because you are afraid of me. Boogerphobes.

[quote]conservativedog wrote:
We are no longer a melting pot when liberals make those changes. How about just plain human American history?

[/quote]

Could you tell me when books were written that discussed history in a fair and balanced way to consider accomplishments of all people before there was a “Black history Month”?

I am truly not concerned with the rest of what you wrote…but this struck me as odd considering you claim “liberals” made changes to history as if they were just fine before.

As far as the OP…I personally think people who cheer any one side as if every negative is “the other side’s fault” are football fanatics who got confused.

Tell me what I need to know from Black History that I didn’t get in the 1960’s-70’s.

That’s essentially my elementary school through high school and first year of college. The late 1980’s I noticed a profound change in my younger siblings school books. It was what I had been taught during my school years as “yellow journalism.”

Let me focus my question. Tell me what I need to know from Black History or Transgender History that would allow me to compete and excel in today’s business world.

Does having a full comprehension of some black or transgender accomplishment make you better at your job?

Life is not and will never be defined by fairness. It’s not about circumstances. It is all about creating opportunities.

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]conservativedog wrote:
We are no longer a melting pot when liberals make those changes. How about just plain human American history?

[/quote]

Could you tell me when books were written that discussed history in a fair and balanced way to consider accomplishments of all people before there was a “Black history Month”?

I am truly not concerned with the rest of what you wrote…but this struck me as odd considering you claim “liberals” made changes to history as if they were just fine before.

As far as the OP…I personally think people who cheer any one side as if every negative is “the other side’s fault” are football fanatics who got confused.[/quote]

[quote]Professor X wrote:

Could you tell me when books were written that discussed history in a fair and balanced way to consider accomplishments of all people before there was a “Black history Month”?

[/quote]

There are still no historical works written that discuss “history in a fair and balanced way to consider the accomplishments of all people.” Not until there is an “Irish History Month” will that happen.

[quote]Professor X wrote:
but this struck me as odd considering you claim “liberals” made changes to history as if they were just fine before.
[/quote]

If anyone is changing history, I’d presume it was liberals before and after black history month. Just listening to people I’m around most of the day (liberal Democrats).

I’m almost knocked off my feet every time I hear accusations that Republicans are the party of slavery, Jim Crow, segregation, anti-Civil Rights, KKK, &c. When in fact it was clearly the liberal Democrats who fought for slavery, established Jim Crow and fought for it, fought for segregation (so much so as standing in the school door way until the President called in the military) both in civilian life and military life, fought against the Civil Rights acts until they realized they better jump on the bandwagon because the gig was up, and hold members in their ranks who are Klansman.

I’d say liberals seem to have a firm grasp on changing history if they don’t even recognize themselves being in the ranks with the protagonist behind pretty much every bad policy since the start of this country.

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
but this struck me as odd considering you claim “liberals” made changes to history as if they were just fine before.
[/quote]

If anyone is changing history, I’d presume it was liberals before and after black history month. Just listening to people I’m around most of the day (liberal Democrats).

I’m almost knocked off my feet every time I hear accusations that Republicans are the party of slavery, Jim Crow, segregation, anti-Civil Rights, KKK, &c. When in fact it was clearly the liberal Democrats who fought for slavery, established Jim Crow and fought for it, fought for segregation (so much so as standing in the school door way until the President called in the military) both in civilian life and military life, fought against the Civil Rights acts until they realized they better jump on the bandwagon because the gig was up, and hold members in their ranks who are Klansman.

I’d say liberals seem to have a firm grasp on changing history if they don’t even recognize themselves being in the ranks with the protagonist behind pretty much every bad policy since the start of this country.[/quote]

Dems can write off their whole sordid history because a couple of them crossed the floor and became Republicans in the 60’s. That’s how it works.

[quote]conservativedog wrote:
Tell me what I need to know from Black History or Transgender History that would allow me to compete and excel in today’s business world.
[/quote]

The premise of your question is flawed. Learning more about cultures that have large influences on the society you are a part of will help anyone excel in today’s business world. You are focusing on “getting rid of Black history month”. Why wouldn’t you be for “inclusion of a more well adjusted look at history”?

History books in the past made it seem like there were very little, if any, influences from other cultures. You seem to be ok with that. How strange.

[quote]Professor X wrote:
…football fanatics who got confused.[/quote]

That’s perfect.

Pure gold!

Mike Wallace: “How are we going to get rid of racism?”

Morgan Freeman: “Stop talking about it”.

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Pure gold!

Mike Wallace: “How are we going to get rid of racism?”

Morgan Freeman: “Stop talking about it”.
[/quote]

The Op said that “liberals changed history” and implied this was for the worse. I am asking why anyone would take that stance when it is very clear that early history books in this country were extremely biased?

Why would someone so concerned with succeeding in current society be focused on “getting rid of Black History Month” INSTEAD of "getting a more rounded look at history for all people?

I am not “Pro Black history month”. I just don’t see the big issue with it. Some of you are cheering for teams and shit instead of looking at reality.

Black History Month is gimmicky and, as Freeman believes, in many ways a degradation.

But you mention “separate history courses to highlight African American…accomplishments.” I literally cannot understand how someone could take issue with this. The nature of higher education mandates that information be broken into subjects and that the material–at times arbitrarily–be divided. I majored in history as an undergraduate, and I took courses with names like:

Historiography and Interpretation: Differing Accounts of Reconstruction

Charlemagne and the Dream of Rome

And a three-semester, 9-credit-in-all honors thesis called “Plague of Justinian.” This culminated in a 70-page research paper focusing on TWO YEARS in ONE CITY during the lesser-known first outbreak of Bubonic plague in Anatolia in 540-542 CE.

It cannot get much more specified or seemingly inconsequential than that.

So: history courses in universities are necessarily divided into subgroups, many of which are constrained by seemingly arbitrary parameters (specific dates, etc.) Why is it that black history does not merit a separate course, its own subgroup? You’re talking about slavery, the Civil War, Reconstruction, Jim Crow, and then the Civil Rights movements. You don’t think there’s enough information there to fill a semester? Of course there is. You can design an entire class around the relationship between Dr. King and the SNCC and you still wouldn’t have enough time to get through it all.

Or is there some other reason that this subject isn’t worthy of study?

By the way, notice that I didn’t defend so-called LGBT classes, because I do not believe that they stand on ground as solid as black history courses.

Good post above. My dad was a history teacher. I think that is why this topic struck me the way it did

The OP’s rant came across as extremely…well…

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Pure gold!

Mike Wallace: “How are we going to get rid of racism?”

Morgan Freeman: “Stop talking about it”.
[/quote]

The Op said that “liberals changed history” and implied this was for the worse. I am asking why anyone would take that stance when it is very clear that early history books in this country were extremely biased?

Why would someone so concerned with succeeding in current society be focused on “getting rid of Black History Month” INSTEAD of "getting a more rounded look at history for all people?

I am not “Pro Black history month”. I just don’t see the big issue with it. Some of you are cheering for teams and shit instead of looking at reality.[/quote]

All history is biased. Black American culture isn’t the only thing text books got wrong. Hell, I’d even say black history wasn’t the worst of what early history textbooks in this country got wrong. But none of those other things get a special month. Instead, we just (for the most part) fix the history books. Treating black American history differently that Jewish American, or European American, is racism. You can rationalize all you want, but you are just arguing with the dictionary.

[quote]smh23 wrote:
You’re talking about slavery, the Civil War, Reconstruction, Jim Crow, and then the Civil Rights movements. You don’t think there’s enough information there to fill a semester? Of course there is. You can design an entire class around the relationship between Dr. King and the SNCC and you still wouldn’t have enough time to get through it all.[/quote]

That’s American history. those things kinda evolved both black and white people. Those issues are as much white history as black.

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Pure gold!

Mike Wallace: “How are we going to get rid of racism?”

Morgan Freeman: “Stop talking about it”.
[/quote]

The Op said that “liberals changed history” and implied this was for the worse. I am asking why anyone would take that stance when it is very clear that early history books in this country were extremely biased?

Why would someone so concerned with succeeding in current society be focused on “getting rid of Black History Month” INSTEAD of "getting a more rounded look at history for all people?

I am not “Pro Black history month”. I just don’t see the big issue with it. Some of you are cheering for teams and shit instead of looking at reality.[/quote]

All history is biased. Black American culture isn’t the only thing text books got wrong. Hell, I’d even say black history wasn’t the worst of what early history textbooks in this country got wrong. But none of those other things get a special month. Instead, we just (for the most part) fix the history books. Treating black American history differently that Jewish American, or European American, is racism. You can rationalize all you want, but you are just arguing with the dictionary.[/quote]

But…this isn’t even true. There are other months dedicated to the cultures of other races. Some of you seem to only focus on Black History month…for some strange reason…while ignoring every other completely…for some reason.

I personally don’t have to rationalize anything. This country has a very biased and racist history influenced by slavery. That is why there is a “Black History Month”…because it was perceived to be necessary by many at that time in order to repair the damage done by centuries of cultural genocide on an entire group of people.

Whether it is still needed is debatable…but acting like every act to counter an extremely racist act in history is also racist seems to be one very cloudy way to view things.

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:
You’re talking about slavery, the Civil War, Reconstruction, Jim Crow, and then the Civil Rights movements. You don’t think there’s enough information there to fill a semester? Of course there is. You can design an entire class around the relationship between Dr. King and the SNCC and you still wouldn’t have enough time to get through it all.[/quote]

That’s American history. those things kinda evolved both black and white people. Those issues are as much white history ass black.[/quote]

? That might be true is slavery were some small blurb in this country’s history…but it isn’t. It was the foundation of the economy and basis of cultural influence that still is felt today in small degrees.

I would say yes, focusing on that alone is worth a course in college.

Why wouldn’t you?

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Pure gold!

Mike Wallace: “How are we going to get rid of racism?”

Morgan Freeman: “Stop talking about it”.
[/quote]

The Op said that “liberals changed history” and implied this was for the worse. I am asking why anyone would take that stance when it is very clear that early history books in this country were extremely biased?

Why would someone so concerned with succeeding in current society be focused on “getting rid of Black History Month” INSTEAD of "getting a more rounded look at history for all people?

I am not “Pro Black history month”. I just don’t see the big issue with it. Some of you are cheering for teams and shit instead of looking at reality.[/quote]

All history is biased. Black American culture isn’t the only thing text books got wrong. Hell, I’d even say black history wasn’t the worst of what early history textbooks in this country got wrong. But none of those other things get a special month. Instead, we just (for the most part) fix the history books. Treating black American history differently that Jewish American, or European American, is racism. You can rationalize all you want, but you are just arguing with the dictionary.[/quote]

But…this isn’t even true. There are other months dedicated to the cultures of other races. Some of you seem to only focus on Black History month…for some strange reason…while ignoring every other completely…for some reason.

I personally don’t have to rationalize anything. This country has a very biased and racist history influenced by slavery. That is why there is a “Black History Month”…because it was perceived to be necessary by many at that time in order to repair the damage done by centuries of cultural genocide on an entire group of people.

Whether it is still needed is debatable…but acting like every act to counter an extremely racist act in history is also racist seems to be one very cloudy way to view things.[/quote]

The opposite of racism is being color blind, not “countering” racism by focusing on race.

It isn’t a counter to racism, it’s part of it.

I’m reminded of a funny exchange I had in high school. A black student approaches me with a survey. Basically he would name a black historical figure and ask a few questions. At that point in time the black fist and African continent was a popular necklace accessory. A fashion statement he took part in. He was actually one of the guys beating up Mexicans and screaming “black power!” on the bus ride home.

So it was odd to see him earnestly taking a survey. Anyways, the questions were basically a match what this figure is known for type of deal. After scoring rather high on my knowledge of these figures, he looked genuinely surprised. He asks me something like, “wow, how’d you pick so much up on them?” I looked at him and said something to the effect of “I paid attention in class.” I suppose our school didn’t really need more on Tubman. It needed more students paying attention.

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:
You’re talking about slavery, the Civil War, Reconstruction, Jim Crow, and then the Civil Rights movements. You don’t think there’s enough information there to fill a semester? Of course there is. You can design an entire class around the relationship between Dr. King and the SNCC and you still wouldn’t have enough time to get through it all.[/quote]

That’s American history. those things kinda evolved both black and white people. Those issues are as much white history ass black.[/quote]

? That might be true is slavery were some small blurb in this country’s history…but it isn’t. It was the foundation of the economy and basis of cultural influence that still is felt today in small degrees.

I would say yes, focusing on that alone is worth a course in college.

Why wouldn’t you?[/quote]

Read what I wrote. I never said it isn’t worth studying. I think it’s very worth it. I think if you went and seriously looked back at some of it, you might learn some things. It just isn’t specifically black history. You don’t have black slaves without white slave owners. There’s no Jim crow without white southern Dems. There is no emancipation proclamation without hundreds of thousands of white northerners dieing. There is no underground railroad without white southerners risking their lives. There aren’t as many lynchings without the white KKK. The civil rights movement is honestly more about white culture and how it changed (was forced to change) than it is about black culture. I find it offensive that things my ancestors may have been a big part of and something that shaped the country I call home isn’t included as part of “my” history.