(07-07-2013 07:39 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote: I am new here, and I don't want to step on any toes, but how is this any more racist than having a Black history month, or Hispanic History month? How about politicians that openly talk about advancing their race?
Black history month isn't racist in my opinion. Seeing as the majority of history is white history given the role blacks had in society until after the civil war. Black history calls attention to accomplishments blacks have made that would not otherwise make it into a history lesson.
Frederick Douglas, MLK and Rosa Parks will make it into most any general history curriculum. But there are specifics about slavery and the civil rights movement that ought to be taught. Having a month dedicated to that ensures those contributions are known.
Talk about the revolution and it's George Washington, Ben Franklin, Thomas Jefferson and others. The civil war Abe Lincoln, REL, USG and others. WWI is Woodrow Wilson, The Kaiser, Black Jack Pershing. WWII is FDR, Eisenhower, Patton, Marshall, Bradley and Truman and others. Whites have dominated society, and as a result history, throughout the centuries. So most every aspect of history will be dominated by whites. Having black history month in recognition of those blacks who also made major contributions to our history is a good thing in my opinion. The intent isn't to elevate blacks over whites. Then it would be racist.
I'm not saying Black History month is racist, but I also don't think having a White History month is racist either. I see racism as thinking your race is superior to another. There is nothing wrong, IMO, with preserving and displaying with pride, your culture and heritage. Don't whites deserve that as well?
(07-07-2013 07:39 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote: I am new here, and I don't want to step on any toes, but how is this any more racist than having a Black history month, or Hispanic History month? How about politicians that openly talk about advancing their race?
Black history month isn't racist in my opinion. Seeing as the majority of history is white history given the role blacks had in society until after the civil war. Black history calls attention to accomplishments blacks have made that would not otherwise make it into a history lesson.
Frederick Douglas, MLK and Rosa Parks will make it into most any general history curriculum. But there are specifics about slavery and the civil rights movement that ought to be taught. Having a month dedicated to that ensures those contributions are known.
Talk about the revolution and it's George Washington, Ben Franklin, Thomas Jefferson and others. The civil war Abe Lincoln, REL, USG and others. WWI is Woodrow Wilson, The Kaiser, Black Jack Pershing. WWII is FDR, Eisenhower, Patton, Marshall, Bradley and Truman and others. Whites have dominated society, and as a result history, throughout the centuries. So most every aspect of history will be dominated by whites. Having black history month in recognition of those blacks who also made major contributions to our history is a good thing in my opinion. The intent isn't to elevate blacks over whites. Then it would be racist.
I'm not saying Black History month is racist, but I also don't think having a White History month is racist either. I see racism as thinking your race is superior to another. There is nothing wrong, IMO, with preserving and displaying with pride, your culture and heritage. Don't whites deserve that as well?
Whites are the dominate group in American society so white pride, culture and heritage is covered all year long. There is no need for a special month. For the record I thing the various months serve as a disservice to those groups. What we have to do is incorporate the whole story into history, not just the generals and the presidents.
(07-07-2013 08:02 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote: I'm not saying Black History month is racist, but I also don't think having a White History month is racist either.
Me either. I just think it's pointless.
Quote:I see racism as thinking your race is superior to another. There is nothing wrong, IMO, with preserving and displaying with pride, your culture and heritage. Don't whites deserve that as well?
It's not a matter of "deserve" from my way of thinking. Who are you going to celebrate in white history month? The same you celebrate in history in general. So what's the point?
Having black, Hispanic or Native American history month is calling attention to the accomplishments of people who are largely overlooked because of the station in which their particular race held in history. At what point have whites ever been overlooked in history? We haven't.
(07-07-2013 08:02 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote: I'm not saying Black History month is racist, but I also don't think having a White History month is racist either.
Me either. I just think it's pointless.
Quote:I see racism as thinking your race is superior to another. There is nothing wrong, IMO, with preserving and displaying with pride, your culture and heritage. Don't whites deserve that as well?
It's not a matter of "deserve" from my way of thinking. Who are you going to celebrate in white history month? The same you celebrate in history in general. So what's the point?
Having black, Hispanic or Native American history month is calling attention to the accomplishments of people who are largely overlooked because of the station in which their particular race held in history. At what point have whites ever been overlooked in history? We haven't.
So what will you say when whites are the minority? I don't see them as being overlooked at all. I think we can all remember learning about all these cultures from early childhood. I disagree that whites are celebrating their heritage just by being the majority. We also tend to lump all other groups under one category. Hispanics are not a monolithic group. They too have many backgrounds, varying traditions and origins.
My point is this. We will never have true equality if we cannot treat groups equally.
(07-07-2013 08:02 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote: I'm not saying Black History month is racist, but I also don't think having a White History month is racist either.
Me either. I just think it's pointless.
Quote:I see racism as thinking your race is superior to another. There is nothing wrong, IMO, with preserving and displaying with pride, your culture and heritage. Don't whites deserve that as well?
It's not a matter of "deserve" from my way of thinking. Who are you going to celebrate in white history month? The same you celebrate in history in general. So what's the point?
Having black, Hispanic or Native American history month is calling attention to the accomplishments of people who are largely overlooked because of the station in which their particular race held in history. At what point have whites ever been overlooked in history? We haven't.
So what will you say when whites are the minority? I don't see them as being overlooked at all. I think we can all remember learning about all these cultures from early childhood. I disagree that whites are celebrating their heritage just by being the majority. We also tend to lump all other groups under one category. Hispanics are not a monolithic group. They too have many backgrounds, varying traditions and origins.
My point is this. We will never have true equality if we cannot treat groups equally.
+1
If we point out demographic differences with History or Pride months how can we overcome these differences? We should be one nation united.
(07-07-2013 08:18 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote: So what will you say when whites are the minority?
The majority/minority status of whites doesn't change history. So it's irrelevant.
Quote:My point is this. We will never have true equality if we cannot treat groups equally.
That's where we part thinking. I don't see having a black history month as treating anyone unequally. Are white figures in history somehow ignored because black history month is around? Clearly not.
And as far as "white heritage" goes, I'm white and I have no idea how you would even quantify that?
(This post was last modified: 07-07-2013 08:33 PM by Ninerfan1.)
(07-07-2013 08:18 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote: So what will you say when whites are the minority?
The majority/minority status of whites doesn't change history. So it's irrelevant.
Quote:My point is this. We will never have true equality if we cannot treat groups equally.
That's where we part thinking. I don't see having a black history month as treating anyone unequally. Are white figures in history somehow ignored because black history month is around? Clearly not.
And as far as "white heritage" goes, I'm white and I have no idea how you would even quantify that?
I would keep in mind that it highlights division. That does create resentment from some. Especially if those heritage months still exist when the US doesn't have a majority anymore. It's the very reason the SC removed the voter rights act. If demographics are changing, then we must also change how we treat groups that will no longer be the minorities.
(07-07-2013 08:32 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote: That's where we part thinking. I don't see having a black history month as treating anyone unequally. Are white figures in history somehow ignored because black history month is around? Clearly not.
But it is treating people unequally. What if we had a white pride month and no black pride month? As this country becomes more and more homogenized, mixed marriage, etc, white people probably will eventually need recognition. The big problem with being white is that it's not stylish to hyphenate our lineage, i.e. I would be an Italian-German-Armenian-Irish-American.
(07-07-2013 07:42 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote: Had he left it at the Confederate flag maybe not. If there is a Black history month why can't white's have one? The watermelons pushed beyond the boundary. I think Democrats dreamed up Black history month, Hispanic heritage month to slice up the population into demographic groups they can say Republicans don't support.
I think the answer can be summed up with this story from my childhood. I once asked my mom why there was a Mothers Day and a Fathers Day, but not Children's Day. She said "every other day is children's day."
(07-07-2013 08:38 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote: I would keep in mind that it highlights division. That does create resentment from some. Especially if those heritage months still exist when the US doesn't have a majority anymore. It's the very reason the SC removed the voter rights act. If demographics are changing, then we must also change how we treat groups that will no longer be the minorities.
Just something to chew on.
If having a black history month fosters resentment in someone then I would encourage that person to do some introspection and realize there are much bigger things to worked up about.
And the fact still stands that if a minority group today becomes a majority group tomorrow it doesn't change history. George Washington doesn't become less important as the ratio of white's to non/whites decreases. Unless you are somehow intimating that once white's are no longer in control minorities will intentionally move to diminish what white figures have done in history?
(07-07-2013 08:32 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote: That's where we part thinking. I don't see having a black history month as treating anyone unequally. Are white figures in history somehow ignored because black history month is around? Clearly not.
But it is treating people unequally. What if we had a white pride month and no black pride month?
Define "white pride." What would one celebrate during "white pride" month?
Quote:As this country becomes more and more homogenized, mixed marriage, etc, white people probably will eventually need recognition.
(07-07-2013 08:32 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote: That's where we part thinking. I don't see having a black history month as treating anyone unequally. Are white figures in history somehow ignored because black history month is around? Clearly not.
But it is treating people unequally. What if we had a white pride month and no black pride month?
Define "white pride." What would one celebrate during "white pride" month?
Quote:As this country becomes more and more homogenized, mixed marriage, etc, white people probably will eventually need recognition.
Recognition for what?
One of the few times that I agree with with Niner. Look in any American History book, there are very few black or Hispanics. When I was growing up the extent of black people in American history was Crispus Attacks getting shot, Dred Scott, Lincoln freeing the slaves, and MLK having a dream. There were even less Hispanics mentioned, just a little blurb about the rough riders, the Alamo, and defeating the Mexicans in war. Most of the book was about white people. I think the point of these months is to show that there is more than what you read in the textbooks.
(07-07-2013 07:42 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote: Had he left it at the Confederate flag maybe not. If there is a Black history month why can't white's have one? The watermelons pushed beyond the boundary. I think Democrats dreamed up Black history month, Hispanic heritage month to slice up the population into demographic groups they can say Republicans don't support.
I think the answer can be summed up with this story from my childhood. I once asked my mom why there was a Mothers Day and a Fathers Day, but not Children's Day. She said "every other day is children's day."
I asked my mom the same thing and got the same answer.
(07-07-2013 08:32 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote: That's where we part thinking. I don't see having a black history month as treating anyone unequally. Are white figures in history somehow ignored because black history month is around? Clearly not.
But it is treating people unequally. What if we had a white pride month and no black pride month?
Define "white pride." What would one celebrate during "white pride" month?
Quote:As this country becomes more and more homogenized, mixed marriage, etc, white people probably will eventually need recognition.
Recognition for what?
One of the few times that I agree with with Niner. Look in any American History book, there are very few black or Hispanics. When I was growing up the extent of black people in American history was Crispus Attacks getting shot, Dred Scott, Lincoln freeing the slaves, and MLK having a dream. There were even less Hispanics mentioned, just a little blurb about the rough riders, the Alamo, and defeating the Mexicans in war. Most of the book was about white people. I think the point of these months is to show that there is more than what you read in the textbooks.
I'll go you one further. In your typical traditional history book, there are probably 10 women mentioned. Got pretty lonely, I'm guessing.
The watermelon remark was a racial stereotype, and the float was seemingly meant to be inflammatory.
I am no big fan of any "ethnic or lifestyle appreciation" events, even if someone is promoting one that applies to me. If one claims to take the high road, you have to not look the other way it hits a little close to home.
(07-07-2013 08:38 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote: I would keep in mind that it highlights division. That does create resentment from some. Especially if those heritage months still exist when the US doesn't have a majority anymore. It's the very reason the SC removed the voter rights act. If demographics are changing, then we must also change how we treat groups that will no longer be the minorities.
Just something to chew on.
If having a black history month fosters resentment in someone then I would encourage that person to do some introspection and realize there are much bigger things to worked up about.
I am not trying to be combative, but couldn't the same be said for having a white history month? History is just that, history. For there to be true equality, we cannot grant certain groups special recognition and a pass to celebrate their heritage while denying another group that same right to recognition. We will have to agree to disagree. I just want to make it clear that IMO, being proud of your race and culture is not being racist until you try to use that to put down another race or culture.
I think one of the biggest double standards resides in our media. People have hidden behind history and majority status to get away with stuff like this.