jump to last post 1-9 of 9 discussions (105 posts)

Does genealogy keep racism alive?

  1. dianetrotter profile image75
    dianetrotterposted 7 weeks ago

    Yesterday I shared a letter from my great, great grandmother with my niece.  She became upset and started saying "That's why I can't forget...."  I stopped her.  I told her white people

    1.  today had nothing to do with slavery
    2. are responsible for what's in their own hearts
    3.  should not be lumped into one group and stereotyped 

    I read an article yesterday about denial of racism.  It was a response to white people who say that racism does not exist.  I thought about reasons why those who deny the existence of racism.

    1.  They feel that they are not racists so racism does not exist.

          My thought:  Because you feel no pain, it doesn't mean that I don't have cancer.

    2.  They (racists) hide behind the denial of racism.
          My thought:  Let them talk long enough and racists will reveal themselves.


    3.  They are ashamed of what their ancestors did and prefer to ignore the subject and/or we want them to feel guilty.

          My thought:   Covering up a problem will not resolve it.  It festers and grows on the inside.

    Yesterday
    WATCH: Confederacy fan insists the flag isn’t racist — then launches racist rant against MLK
    https://www.rawstory.com/2017/08/watch- … ther-coon/ 

    Other links to references of Martin Luther "Coon"

    weatherman giving weather for MK Coon Day
    http://www.foxnews.com/story/2005/01/17 … -slur.html 

    Oops!  Just garbled my words.  I say, "no!  You said what you normally say!"
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/1 … 27558.html

    On #3, I feel we, as African Americans, should show the compassion that we want shown to us.  None of us were there during slavery.  We all have a connection through ancestors, shame, anger, and every emotion one can think of.

    What does a world with no raccism look like?  Can we really expect there to be no racism?  I think not.  We are imperfect people.  However, we should not give up trying.

    1. TIMETRAVELER2 profile image93
      TIMETRAVELER2posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

      There is little or any racism in Japan, which is a nation made up mostly of one race!

      1. dianetrotter profile image75
        dianetrotterposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

        That's wonderful for Japan.

      2. ptosis profile image80
        ptosisposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

        That's crazy. Japanese men think they are better than everybody else in the whole world.

    2. Credence2 profile image83
      Credence2posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

      1.    “Yesterday I shared a letter from my great, great grandmother with my niece.  She became upset and started saying "That's why I can't forget...."  I stopped her.  I told her white people”

      First of all, you will have to share with me the location and content of such a letter. It would be interesting to get the prospective of a black woman who had  lived so long ago.

      If you want me to forget, then don’t continue to give me cause to remember. This statue thing is a case in point. When racism is reduced to the level in the minds and hearts of people as the 17th century witch finding culture of Salem is today then we will have arrived.

      There are good people everywhere, judge people on an individual basis and they will ultimately reveal their true character to you. Keep keen and you can see much that they (he or she) did not intend to reveal.  The problems that I have with this culture and society are more structural and institutional, and are far beyond anything that could be directed to a single individual.

      I, of course, have grappled with issue for many years. There is a human tendency to be tribal and have greater affinity toward those that look like you. We are all guilty of it. It is only civility that prevents me from descending to baser instincts, no more than I would go out in my BVDs to check my mailbox. Civility toward each other is how we will ultimately survive. Civility requires that we judge people by their character, preparation and performance. It is the way that you would want to be treated and evaluated.   

      This is not a uniquely American problem but from what I learn in my travels, I have never seen racism as entrenched as deeply as it is here. I would like to think of myself as deToqueville sort, looking for key elements of the societies that I visit. But, I give the American people some credit, the country always had an attitude of attempting to improve things. In other societies, people are more resigned to things as they are regarding social problems. But, claiming the equality of man and the rule of law is a high standard. For it to mean anything, it has to be more than words.  Abe Lincoln once said that he would prefer despotism in Russia rather than live somewhere just as despotic but shrouded in hypocrisy. 

      Japan is a homogeneous society, but I bet that even they have, within their society, mechanisms through which they discriminate against one another for non-merit factors, it is just not based on race.

      Those that say that racism does not exist are quite naive, or do not want face reality.

      I can’t ask whites to be ashamed of a history from ancestors that did this so long ago.(slavery)
      Instead of being ashamed, avoid backsliding and keep moving in the right direction so that an unsavory past, Slavery and Jim Crow, need not be so often an overriding theme for race relations here.
      But,  racism continues to come in the form of those that deny the nature of what did in fact happen, mitigating it or denying that it occurred, much like the Holocaust Deniers.

      1. dianetrotter profile image75
        dianetrotterposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

        Credence2, I'm giving a location for a collection of slave narratives.  My great grandmother's is Ella Glespie (Elnora Gillespie).  the reason I'm giving the location is that there are some that really speak to the "whoopins" and ill treatment of slaves.

        https://memory.loc.gov/mss/mesn/023/023.pdf 
        I hope you are able to open this!


        I agree that those that deny are in denial for a reason.

        1. dianetrotter profile image75
          dianetrotterposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

          I suppose the slave narratives are available on Amazon.com also.  Here is my great grandmother's

          https://books.google.com/books?id=eKkOB … mp;f=false

          1. dianetrotter profile image75
            dianetrotterposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

            DJT just pardoned Joe Arpaio!!!

            1. Credence2 profile image83
              Credence2posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

              Yes, Diane, I heard this

              So Arpaio has been involved in the following:
              ==================================
              The criminal conviction grew out of a lawsuit filed a decade ago charging that the sheriff’s office regularly violated the rights of Latinos, stopping people based on racial profiling, detaining them based solely on the suspicion that they were in the country illegally and turning them over to the immigration authorities.

              A federal district judge hearing the case ordered Mr. Arpaio in 2011 to stop detaining people based solely on suspicion of their immigration status, when there was no evidence that a state law had been broken. But the sheriff insisted that his tactics were legal and that he would continue employing them.
              He was convicted last month of criminal contempt of court for defying the order, a misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in jail.
              ==========================

              Why would I be surprised? Everybody says 'give the guy (Trump) a chance', well, he has sure shown his mettle this time. Obama was criticized for making any comment about cases of alleged police misconduct, yet Trump pardons someone found guilty in the court. Even though, it is just a misdemeanor, it sends a clear message to the Hispanic community and to me, as well, as to which side he is on. Perhaps, just another example of why all those 'old bones' can never stay buried. Also the article indicated that he, too, was a 'birther', and consequently just more rightwing rubbish.

              1. jonnycomelately profile image87
                jonnycomelatelyposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                Just a question from an outsider:  do you think this from the mind of DJT?  Or is it other minds with ulterior motives?

                1. dianetrotter profile image75
                  dianetrotterposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                  Jonny, Who can know the mind of this person we have as president?

                  No I gathered my assumptions based on discussions with people.
                  1.  A white guy @ work seemed to be mad at me about bussing (in the 70s) - I had nothing to do with bussing and had just graduated college.  I wasn't even a concern for me.

                  2.  Guy from #1 and others use to tell anecdotes about people they knew who couldn't get jobs because the law required that they hire Black people.  And in their minds, the Black people were always less qualified.

                  3.  When I was promoted to an operations audit position, the secretary said they should have hired her.  I had an MBA and she had high school.

                  4.  The assignment clerk would gossip and say I would go off "half cocked."  Other auditors had pages and pages of forms that didn't have the boxes checked off for a product receiving audit.  My audit revealed concern for systemic failures.  Boxes set in receiving for months to years.  My recommendations:  a) If you don't know where it goes, send it back, b) if you do know where it goes, get it there.  Holding could stop line production, meeting shipment deadlines, unresolved accounts payable, etc.

                  5.  Michelle Obama is proud that she lives in the White House that was built by slaves.  All of a sudden, she is race baiting.

                  6.  The Charlotsville, Nazi guy said he became one after he saw what Trayvon Martin, Mike Brown, and Tamir Rice did.  Trayvon and Tamir were innocent kids minding their own business.  I don't discuss Mike Brown because his is sketchy and more complicated.  There always seems to be a reason that Black people deserve to be killed because they are threatening or look a certain.

                  7.  Yes, DJT tries to turn a Nazi march into a deal about moving/removing statues.

                  So I was reflecting and thinking what others have said and done.  Call me crazy but that's what I came up with.

                  1. Credence2 profile image83
                    Credence2posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                    =======================================================================
                    "2.  Guy from #1 and others use to tell anecdotes about people they knew who couldn't get jobs because the law required that they hire Black people.  And in their minds, the Black people were always less qualified.

                    3.  When I was promoted to an operations audit position, the secretary said they should have hired her.  I had an MBA and she had high school.
                    ======================================================================

                    I have run into this as part of my career too. Does it ever occur to them that maybe, just maybe, through education and training, you could be just as qualified for the job as any of them? This society is full of "Secretaries" who seem to think that there is a rough equivalency between a black college graduate and a white high school dropout. How is that so? That irks me to no end. 
                    ==============================================================
                    5.  Michelle Obama is proud that she lives in the White House that was built by slaves.  All of a sudden, she is race baiting.
                    ========================
                    The hypocrisy just makes you want to scream, The Obama's were a confessed Christian family. Mr. Obama has an attractive wife and two darling little girls. Yet he was denigrated by the Christian Right as an infidel, yet Trump is excused as a 'baby Christian', while all the ministers 'lay on the hands'. White supremacy seems to be a religion that is worshipped above that that these so called ministers confess. Trump's Melania spreads 'em wide' for a glossy centerfold, while Ms. Obama, as first lady, is criticized for wearing a sleeveless blouse? Where was all the outrage from the Christian Right?
                    ====================================================
                    6.  The Charlotsville, Nazi guy said he became one after he saw what Trayvon Martin, Mike Brown, and Tamir Rice did.  Trayvon and Tamir were innocent kids minding their own business.  I don't discuss Mike Brown because his is sketchy and more complicated.  There always seems to be a reason that Black people deserve to be killed because they are threatening or look a certain.
                    =====================================
                    I agree, with Trayvon Martin, everyone seems to think that this boy had no right to be concerned about stalkers and his own safety and security. Being a 'black thug', he was automatically assumed to be the protagonist in any encounter.  And, how stupid is it to kill a 13 year old boy with a toy gun, when a little consideration and adult behavior from Cleveland law enforcement could have averted this tragedy?
                    =============================================
                    So I was reflecting and thinking what others have said and done.  Call me crazy but that's what I came up with.
                    ============================================
                    So, before I allow so many to find comfort in complacency, double standards and hypocrisy, I will continue to remain 'the fly in the ointment' or 'the pain in the a$$', as it were. I can and do say that I have found my calling.

                2. Credence2 profile image83
                  Credence2posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                  Just a question from an outsider:  do you think this from the mind of DJT?  Or is it other minds with ulterior motives?

                  Johnny, this is the mind of Donald J. Trump. He, obviously, was indifferent of the message he sent to the Hispanic community in Arizona regarding the sanctity of the law. When he sent that message to them he sent it to me as well. We have issues of racial profiling within the Black community and his response to this matter does not give me any more confidence in those areas that concern me even more directly. His 'leadership", if you can call it that,  encourages other bigots of like mind to act boldly.  This old sheriff is too old to torment a great deal as this is more about Trump's attitudes and motives over the Sheriff himself. Trump's record and past clearly points to this outcome. I am not surprised. Did I answer your question?

                  1. dianetrotter profile image75
                    dianetrotterposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                    DWB=driving while black

                    Many of the confrontations, some deadly, are the result of dwb/wwb over something minor.

        2. Credence2 profile image83
          Credence2posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

          Thanks Diane, Oddly enough I have stumbled upon this project in other reading within the last year of two and had photographs of those that were interviewed. So I picked up that your great-grandma was born in 1868 and at age 71, we are at about the year 1939 or 1940. How old was her father relative to her, when was he born? Seems like he was quite an accomplished fellow.

          My great grandmother on my mums side was born in 1890 and lived until 1944.  So, I never had the chance to meet her. I did have the good fortune of meeting my great grandfather in the year before his passing, 1959. I was the darling little boy of a brand new generation. They also resided in Arkansas. Have you heard of either Stamps or Lake Village? I have no genealogy records of any forebears that were actually slaves, all of that had been lost. Mom told me that her grandmum  died with a creepy smile on her face, as if she were greeting God, Himself. Her mom and her aunts forced my mom to look upon her body at the funeral home, while she was lying 'in state'.  It was uncanny that she knew that she was going to die that very afternoon while there was no indication that she was ill. She prepared everything around the house as if she were not going to return.  Digging around for some of this stuff has been a hobby of mine, and I have nothing but time these days.

          Thanks for sharing....

          1. dianetrotter profile image75
            dianetrotterposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

            I'm glad you find it interesting.  I am trying to figure out which Henry belongs to them.  Back then they were sometimems called by their middle name or a nickname.  Also, isoslating race doesn't help because on some censuses they are considered white and mulatto on others.

            When we were young, we made fun of people who lived outside of Little Rock:  Stamps, Lake Village, Solgohacha, Pankey, etc.  Little did we know that those areas would be come suburban, expensive land.  My cousins lived on Route 5, Box 571A and 572A.  I didn't even realize the river was so the other side of the hill.  Now you can only by the property in 2 acre lots and the house you build must be over 2500 sq ft.  Many elderly family died and their land was purchased by wealthy people.  I'm looking to by a small piece of the land as someone loses it.  There are a couple of possibilities.

      2. Ivan Tod profile image60
        Ivan Todposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

        I think the strongest and most overlooked, or even not known, underlying mentality behind racism in America is that its white racists are not so upest at integration itself, but rather they are upset that "their" country is now open to everyone, affording all of its citizens (and even many non-citizens) equal rights. They believe America was and is a white country which only tolerates the rest for what they can be used for. Now that the "white America" mindset is no longer valid in a primarily non-white population, outward racism and bigotry has returned. It fills the need of the white racist to continue feeling superior to the rest.

        While I'm here, I saw a news report on how a statue of christopher columbus was destroyed. The local news reporters didn't seem to understand why someone would do that. Well, guess what, the arrival of christopher columbus to the "New World" is responsible for the most egregious yet purposely overlooked genocide ever purpetrated and at 90% killed I'd say he did a damn effective job. So, if General Lee's statue had to go because of what it supposedly represented, so should christopher columbus's and every other publically displayed image of such a nature.

        1. Credence2 profile image83
          Credence2posted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

          Hello, Ivan

          I would have liked to think that  we are not hopelessly down this wrong road.

          Taking down all the statues would be so impractical with questionable value, I would move away from that. People just need to think about what and who are represented and commemorated  by the likenesses depicted and what does that say about them and their society in total?

          1. Ivan Tod profile image60
            Ivan Todposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

            Well, it's kind of like, say, a lion at the zoo. No matter how well the lion tamer trains it, it's still a lion and its instinct is to kill, eat, sleep and procreate. People, unfortunately, are very similar. Yeah, being in a zoo lions outwardly act tame but in reality, given the chance they will kill and eat the weaker animals in an instant. Racists, yeah, they tend for the most part to keep it to themselves but given the opportunity to openly express it, well, you saw what happened...Lions will always be that way and so will bigoted racists. Anyway, Pandora's Box has been laid wide open! Albeit accidentally by all the bandwagon politicians, who, sadly, would never have made it an issue had not their voters made it one. Their political correctness caused them to overlook the potential for ensuing issues such as we have with the christopher columbus statue. As far as not removing said offending icons goes, history already has a way of "altering" the truth. So removing these icons of evil deeds and ideologies will only help history hide its ugliest moments. I say keep those icons in place but with an explanation of how they really fit into history. This way they can't hide their racist/bigoted essence in plain sight, as they have been doing since 1492 AD, and people will get the full story on American history as opposed to just the history of the victors.

            p.s. I just had a thought; Since history is told by the victors, if the non-racist/bigoted movement in America does prevail, what will their history books say? Will they tell the whole truth or just the positive parts that supported their ideology?

            p.s.s. Which version would be better for America at large? Especially since the freedom to be racist is guaranteed by the constitution, which many will say it isn't, but it is.

            1. Credence2 profile image83
              Credence2posted 4 weeks agoin reply to this

              Greetings, Ivan, I have been meaning to get back with you on this, but unfortunately Irma is a b*tch who will not be denied.
              I would like to be less pessimistic about human nature. Unlike the Lions, people have the ability to reason and need not react and behave on a totally instinctual basis.  But, we all function within social constructs.
              Ultimately, that is based upon on economics and wielding of power over others. Racism is just an arm of that command and control system. How do we distribute goods and services? The Feudalists were honest about it, if you were a Lord, you have, if you were a serf, you have not. Next comes slavery, it posing the idea of everybody getting rich at the expense of others. The South with its plantations and its slaves and the North making big money processing the cotton into finished product in its garment industries. So, who were the serfs, the underdogs, as there always seems to have to be one? The 4 million slaves in the South that made wealth for others without compensation? These men and women were consigned to oblivion anyway, so why ‘rock the apple cart’? When one studies ante-bellum America, economic benefit always trumped morality even among the greatest of our ‘so called’ heroes. The way to win a struggle is to eliminate competition; racism served that role in our capitalist system. We, as a group have been offered a chance for some economic opportunity in this society. But, its value is questionable if the same idea of having someone else new consigned as the underdog is the alternative. Those at the top of the food chain are intrinsically unfair keeping the system and access to its rewards to themselves. Such was the case during the Middle Ages as it is now in Capitalist America. When the acquisition of material wealth ceases to be the guiding motivation of our cultures and indirectly, its people, then will the human race advance beyond its infancy.

              I am reminded of a  StarTrek, (the Next Generation) episode. The program has many episodes that make interesting commentary about our current time. Flash forward to the 24th century, the Enterprise finds 3 20th century humans preserved in cryogenic freeze at death, with the hope that they could be resuscitated and cured of what during their time were terminal illnesses. There was this one guy among the three that kept complaining about executive washroom keys and Wall Street Journal’s as if the values of the 20th century were not changed after 300 years. This fellow was an artifact in a curios shop, an antique having a negative connotation. To think, that I have to live in such a world.  In a world of molecular pattern replicators, where virtually anything can be recreated at the atomic and molecular level, where is the want? Society’s construct has changed to where the accumulation of material goods at the expense of others is no longer the driving force in our existence. When that happens, there is no longer any advantage to be gained through racism, no more underdogs? Unfortunately, such a device, if possible at all, lies at the end of several rainbows. Such a device presents insurmountable technical challenges from the perspective of our current science and technological levels.

              Would such technology, if available, have the potential of changing our need to take before being taken? On a smaller scale, in the 21st century, no longer having to pursue economic needs in the same way, I resolve to spend my time improving and enriching myself with all the opportunities that life offers. I anxiously await the time when all of the things that we currently argue about disappear as just so much dust in history’s bin. But that too, requires a new humanity with a new perspective.

              As for the history books, there has already been revisionists attempts to change established historical fact for ideological purposes, check out Texas and their textbook writers. Only Texas would allow auto mechanics to weigh in on appropriate content on these textbooks while ignoring established academic historians. That is just one from among the many reasons that I don’t live there. As I have tried to tell certain people before, what you say is true, i.e. before about 1960, there can’t be found any “Cowboy and Indian” movie where the position of the Indian was sympathized with in any fashion. It was the sixties and seventies that forced society to see more than ‘Stepin Fetchit’, ‘Mammy” and a host of characters glorifying the antebellum South and stereotyping an entire group of people even before those who knew nothing about cotton nor plantations. How easy was it for the dominant culture to lie and misrepresent….. New voices and reports came in to balance “the story” as traditionally and previously told from only one side.

              I don’t know if I properly addressed your question, but everyone has the freedom of choice to make their own associations. But, it ends at the when you step out of the front door of your house, in the realm of public accommodation and the law itself, racism which manifests itself as discrimination, quite frequently, must be prohibited.

              1. dianetrotter profile image75
                dianetrotterposted 4 weeks agoin reply to this

                The sad thing is how discussion of race polarizes people, even those you maintain a professional relationships with on a daily basis. 

                I looked @ a forum that was "fresh meat" race bait meant to cloud the ugliness of racism.  I identified it for what it is and chose not to get involved.  It reminds me of the 'needling" and attempts to shame me as a young Black, educated professional, on bussing, affirmative action and every other little thing that annoyed racists.  Run on sentence - sorry!

                We are accused of race baiting and "not letting it go"; however, it is obvious from the comments of others that they want to "keep it going" and feel superior.  Exercises in semantics are meant to frustrate and belittle us....and still, "I arise!"

                Sorry for ranting Ivan and Credence2!

                1. Live to Learn profile image80
                  Live to Learnposted 4 weeks agoin reply to this

                  Race bait, you say? This is where I have problems. If one group wants to claim their 'race' is being baited it is difficult to understand how similar terminology directed at others of a perceived 'race' are not being baited. Why is one OK and the other taboo? If we live in an open  and equal society where dialogue is, truly, looked forward to.

                2. Credence2 profile image83
                  Credence2posted 4 weeks agoin reply to this

                  The sad thing is how discussion of race polarizes people, even those you maintain a professional relationships with on a daily basis. 

                  How true, how many eons of time must past before we can move along? You should have seen my co-workers after the TV miniseries "Roots" was televised back in 1977. I told my white co-workers that they did not have to apologize to me!!!
                  ------------------------------------
                  I looked @ a forum that was "fresh meat" race bait meant to cloud the ugliness of racism.  I identified it for what it is and chose not to get involved.  It reminds me of the 'needling" and attempts to shame me as a young Black, educated professional, on bussing, affirmative action and every other little thing that annoyed racists.  Run on sentence - sorry!

                  You don't have to go very far, many of the Yahoo discussions on articles where race is a theme brings out absolute monsters. Compared to that, this is a relatively tame and orderly communications medium. The reality is for them that if you have anything, whether it be to your credit or not, it is too much.
                  --------------------------------------
                  We are accused of race baiting and "not letting it go"; however, it is obvious from the comments of others that they want to "keep it going" and feel superior.  Exercises in semantics are meant to frustrate and belittle us....and still, "I arise!"

                  I would be a "fool" to 'let it go', while it still raises its head in American life, loud and clear. Keeping my finger on America's pulse is my business and has been a survival tool. Some day we may go beyond all of this, but it will be, like warp drive, at the end of many rainbows.....
                  --------------------------------------------
                  Sorry for ranting Ivan and Credence2!

                  Not at all, your input is always appreciated, Diane...

                  1. dianetrotter profile image75
                    dianetrotterposted 4 weeks agoin reply to this

                    Thank you Cred!  People talk past each other when they want to make their own point, regardless of what they are responding to.  My post did not broadbrush a "group."  My perspective is shaped by my experiences and I addressed them.

                    I hate stereotypes.  I have not, and never will, complain about what a group of people do.  The intent is to pull me into a discussion on "groups!"

    3. ptosis profile image80
      ptosisposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

      Burakumin: DNA indentical to rest of Japan, destroyed by prejudice.

      How to Destroy People: Japan's Untouchables
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SIsndKk … e=youtu.be

      YES Genealogy DOES keep it alive. Start at 6:15 about the illegal books circulated around businesses to avoid hiring or marrying certain Japanese called the Burakumin,  a people within a people. For hundreds of years, they experienced direct persecution that has kept them from being fully functional members of society. Even though they were released from their caste in the 1800's, the stigma remains to this day.

      Due to the taboo nature of the topic, it is rarely covered by the media, and people from eastern Japan, for example, are often shocked when they learn that it is a continuing issue.

      1. dianetrotter profile image75
        dianetrotterposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

        Wow!  I'm shocked now.  I never heard of Burakumin.  Thank you!

      2. dianetrotter profile image75
        dianetrotterposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

        Video is quite compelling.  I've watched 6 minutes.  I've got to brush my teeth, get coffee and finish watching.

        It's interesting how they created their own language, gangs, took pride in the tattoos, etc

    4. dianetrotter profile image75
      dianetrotterposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

      I'm following an interesting convo in Arkansas about schools named for Confederates.

      Excerpt
      "Pamela Smith, a spokesman for the Little Rock School District, said no complaints have been voiced about the name of David O. Dodd Elementary School.
      Dodd, 17, was hanged by the Union Army for being a spy for the Confederacy."

      I know these schools.  I had no idea they were named after Conferate people.

      Full article

      District officials say matter deserves attention but it’s not now a priority

      Arkansas has a few schools named after people associated with the Confederacy, but there's been little call to change those names, contrary to calls in other parts of the country.

      Jim Rollins, superintendent of Springdale schools, said he's had "a minimal number of complaints" about the name of Robert E. Lee Elementary School, which opened in 1951 and is the oldest school in use in Springdale. He wouldn't give a specific number but said the complaints amounted to "less than a handful."

      But with the political climate in the nation and Confederate statues being removed in several cities, the issue deserves attention, he said.
      "I think it's an important issue and one that we are studying," said Rollins. "But we've got to make sure we don't cause more problems than we cure. ... The whole issue obviously is very emotionally charged."

      Randy Hutchinson, president of the Springdale School Board, said he personally hasn't received any complaints about the school name.

      "Honestly, I'd never thought about it until all this stuff from Charlottesville and about the statues came up in the last couple of months," he said, referring to violence that arose from a protest over a statue last month in the Virginia city.

      Hutchinson said he grew up in Springdale and always knew the school simply as Lee Elementary. He said many people may not know it's named for the Confederate general, but a sign out front proclaims it Robert E. Lee Elementary School.

      "At this time, obviously no decisions have been made, but we'll continue to study it," he said. "Right now, business is normal, just taking care of kids."
      In other states, schools named for noted Confederates have become an issue, particularly where the majority of students are black. Few black pupils attend Lee Elementary in Springdale.

      Justin Swope, the principal at Lee Elementary, said the school had 474 pupils as of Thursday. The demographic breakdown was 52 percent Hispanic, 28 percent Pacific Islanders, 17 percent white, 3 percent black and 1 percent American Indian.

      Lee Elementary serves pupils in pre-kindergarten through fifth grade.

      Pamela Smith, a spokesman for the Little Rock School District, said no complaints have been voiced about the name of David O. Dodd Elementary School.
      Dodd, 17, was hanged by the Union Army for being a spy for the Confederacy.

      "I'm not aware of any other schools with names of Civil War heroes," Smith said about the district. "But it is not an issue or a discussion that has been raised by any of the families in our district."

      Little Rock had a few other schools that were named for Confederate officers or soldiers, but those schools have all closed.

      According to the Little Rock School District's website, lrsd.org, the city had elementary schools named for Confederate Gens. Robert E. Lee and Thomas J. "Stonewall" Jackson; Albert Pike, a Confederate soldier, lawyer and writer; and James Mitchell, who served in the Confederate army and later was president and editor-in-chief of the Arkansas Democrat.

      Lee Elementary operated from 1954-67. Jackson Elementary was open from 1906-71. Mitchell Elementary operated from 1909 to 2005. It's unknown when Pike Elementary was built, but it last operated under that name in 1955, and the school closed in 1982, according to the website.

      In Forrest City, there's been no effort to rename the high school and junior high, said Kendall Owens, a spokesman for the school district.

      Forrest City is named for Nathan Bedford Forrest, a Confederate general who was believed to be the first grand wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, although he denied any association with the group when he testified before a congressional committee in 1871, according to history.com.

      "No, we have not had any conversations regarding that," Owens said of renaming the schools. "At this point in time, we have not had anyone to my knowledge who has come forward and raised an issue with the school district using the city's name as part of the school's names."

      When asked if anyone had suggested changing the name of Forrest City, Mayor Larry Bryant laughed and said "I'm not getting into that one."
      Bryant said that would be the extent of his comment.

      Lee County in east Arkansas is named for Robert E. Lee, and Lee High School is named for the county.

      County Judge Terry Sandefer said he hasn't heard any talk about changing the Lee County name. Since it has been an issue in other parts of the country, he wondered if it would come up in the Arkansas Delta, "but I haven't heard anything, no talk about it," he said.

      Sandefer said Lee County was named by a black Arkansas legislator. According to the Encyclopedia of Arkansas History and Culture, legislation to create the county was moved through the General Assembly in 1873 by William Furbush, a black Republican -- at the time -- who represented Phillips County in the state House of Representatives.

      Lee County was cobbled together from parts of Phillips, Monroe, St. Francis, and Crittenden counties.

      "Phillips County opposed the bill, which would have named the proposed county 'Coolidge County' and then, in a second version, 'Woodford County,'" according to the Arkansas Encyclopedia. "Both versions were defeated. The persistent Furbush finally pushed it through when the county's name was changed to honor the South's 'Great Chieftain,' Robert E. Lee, and [Furbush] was named sheriff of the new Lee County."

      There's a statue of Lee in the middle of the town square in Marianna, which is the Lee County seat. Sandefer said he's heard no talk about removing it.
      "We'll have to cross that bridge when we get to that, I guess," he said.

      Cleburne County in north-central Arkansas was named after Patrick Cleburne, a general in the Confederate States Army.

      Rachelle Evans, the Cleburne County clerk, said she's heard no talk of changing the county's name. Neither has her husband Chad Evans, who's a member of the county's Quorum Court.

      In Pine Bluff, there's a George Washington Carver/Forrest Park/Greenville Preschool. Principal Marceinia Peoples said the school was once in the Forrest Park neighborhood of Pine Bluff. Peoples said she doesn't know whether that part of the city was named after Nathan Bedford Forrest, but there's been no talk of changing the school's name. The preschool has more than 150 pupils, most of whom are black.

      The Fort Smith School Board decided in 2015 to remove the Rebel as the Southside High School mascot and "Dixie" as the fight song because of concern that the Confederate symbols were offensive to some who equated them with racism. A committee eventually chose the Mavericks as the school's new mascot.

      1. dianetrotter profile image75
        dianetrotterposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

        TY!  Checking it out now.

    5. dianetrotter profile image75
      dianetrotterposted 4 weeks agoin reply to this

      code word games in Harrison, Arkansas

      Two billboards containing messages that some people found offensive were removed last week in Harrison. The lessee had neglected to make a $20 permit renewal payment that’s due to the state every other year.

      When she offered two billboards for lease on her family farm near Harrison three years ago, Carrie Myers said she had no idea they would be emblazoned with racially tinged messages.

      One of the signs along U.S. 65 read: "Welcome to Harrison. Beautiful town. Beautiful people. No wrong exits. No bad neighborhoods."

      Underneath it, a second bright yellow sign with black lettering read: "Diversity is a code word for white genocide."

      Myers, who is white and adopted a Hispanic daughter 12 years ago, said she thought there was nothing she could do because the billboard lessee would have a right to free speech under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. She had signed a five-year lease.

      But after two Harrison lawyers got involved, the billboards came down Wednesday.

      The lessee had neglected to pay a $20 permit renewal fee that is due every two years to the Arkansas Department of Transportation, said Kelsey Bardwell, who credited her law partner Catherine Golden for catching the violation.

      The Transportation Department sent a letter to the lessee, Brian Bryant of Harrison, on Feb. 1, 2016, saying it was his "final notice."

      "Signs with expired permits are illegal and their removal is required," according to a letter signed by Jeff Ingram, head of the Transportation Department's beautification section.

      But the billboards remained up for another year and a half while Bryant paid $75 a month to Myers, even though the wrap on the top billboard was badly torn.

      "We kept thinking surely it will fall," Myers said. "I think we even prayed some about that. ... That's just not who Harrison is anymore. The signs are offensive to a lot of people I know, including me and my family."

      Bardwell said Bryant hired Harrison Sign Co. to remove the printed wraps that were attached to the wooden billboard frames on Myers' property.

      Myers credited Golden and Bardwell for helping her and Harrison, which has had similar billboards for years.

      "They came to my rescue," said Myers, who has a half dozen billboards around town.

      "I did not think as a landlord I had a right to censor their signs regardless of how despicable I thought they were, because of free speech," she said. "My daughter has black friends. I have black friends. I don't even think about your color."

      Bardwell said she is encouraging Harrison landowners to put a clause in their contracts saying they get to approve any billboard wrap before it goes up on their property.

      "We were able to help her find a way to get them down," Bardwell said. "Landowners have their own free speech rights when it comes to their property."

      Bryant didn't return a voice mail left for him Monday at the telephone number on his initial permit application with the Transportation Department.

      Thom Robb, leader of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, said in an email that he didn't put the billboards up.

      "But from what I understand, they are not being 'removed' as such but are being relocated," he wrote.

      When asked in an email where the signs would reappear, Robb didn't respond.

      Bardwell said a member of Harrison's Community Task Force on Race Relations referred Myers to her law firm, and they did the work pro bono.

      Harrison received national media attention in 2013 when a billboard went up in town that read "Anti-Racist is a Code Word for Anti-White."

      Bardwell said that billboard is gone, but there is still a billboard on the eastern edge of Harrison advertising "White Pride Radio."

      Harrison has been dogged by image problems since race riots in 1905 and 1909 that drove all but one black person out of the city. The problem was exacerbated in the 1980s when Robb moved to rural Boone County and began using a Harrison post office box for the group's mailing address.

      According to the 2010 U.S. Census, Harrison had a population of 12,943, which included 12,448 white and 34 black residents.

  2. Marie Flint profile image91
    Marie Flintposted 7 weeks ago

    Geneology doesn't go as deep as DNA tracing, which surprises most people in realizing they have lived in many different countries in past embodiments.

    I remember the young, red-haired, freckled boy on the  Oprey Winfrey Show. The boy related that he had been a black soldier during the Civil War. He had drawn pictures of himself with a bayonet on his rifle before coming onto the show, and the pictures were presented closeup with the camera.

    In listening to channelings by Lee Carroll of Kryon, Lee is destined to re-embody as a black leader in Africa to unify the countries into one nation state with common currency. Wisdom will reign in Africa, and this will set an example for other countries to follow in running their governments.

    So, reassure your daughter that the past is past. A few people may be stuck in the past, but we, as human beings, are evolving. Be in the present because the future is bright!

    1. dianetrotter profile image75
      dianetrotterposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

      Hi Marie!  Thank you for your thoughts.  I don't believe in evolution.  Maybe some others here do.

      1. wilderness profile image94
        wildernessposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

        Don't you mean reincarnation?

        1. dianetrotter profile image75
          dianetrotterposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

          Duh!  Thanks Wilderness!  Keep me on my toes.  I did mean reincarnation.

          1. jonnycomelately profile image87
            jonnycomelatelyposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

            Just caught up with this thread.... been travelling.
            My understanding of "racism," placing limitations on the perceived intelligence, capabilities, mentality or morality based on genetic back ground/country of birth; also based on colour of skin/hair/facial and bodily features.  Other people might not totally agree with this.  Whatever, it's anti-social, destructive, divisive.
            A more common reaction to difference is with culture, in other words the type clothes, food, music, language.  These things are usually what make people feel uncomfortable.
            If we feel we want to know the person or people more, then we will make an effort to get through any fear/distrust/reluctance.
            It only needs just a little step away from the familiar and you might find yourself with a new friendship.
            Please, anyone with a darker skin, it does not have to start with me, just because I have a lighter skin.  I want your friendship - if you are a genuine and reasonable person at heart it can equally start with you.

  3. Live to Learn profile image80
    Live to Learnposted 7 weeks ago

    It's easy to imagine a world without racism. Just remember when you were a kid and you didn't see anyone of any color as different because of it.

    1. dianetrotter profile image75
      dianetrotterposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

      Up until the age of 3 I only remember being home and playing with neighborhood kids.  At 4/5 when going to public places, I started the experience.  My parents never gave an introduction to what I should expect.  I guess it is because Jim Crow was all they knew.

      1. Live to Learn profile image80
        Live to Learnposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

        I wasn't aware until high school.

        1. dianetrotter profile image75
          dianetrotterposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

          I'm sure location has a lot to do with it.  My cousin, Jesse, lives in Michigan.  When he was in service back in the early 60s, he was stationed somewhere in Mississippi.  He was at a local place playing pool.  He was toldl coloreds couldn't use the pool table.

          1. Live to Learn profile image80
            Live to Learnposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

            Our area had a fairly even split of whites and blacks. We simply didn't notice. I remember a couple of high school girls coming into our classroom when I was in seventh grade. I'll never forget what they said. They told  us to enjoy it because things wouldn't be the same next year. They were the sister and a friend of my friend. Both black. They were right. High school was a battleground of conflicting emotions between whites and blacks.  It wasn't just the kids. The administration did everything they could to ensure color was noticed. The administration was primarily composed of blacks.

            1. dianetrotter profile image75
              dianetrotterposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

              Where was that school?  When was that?  Why didn't parents go to the school board?  I'd like to read about this one!

              1. Live to Learn profile image80
                Live to Learnposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                It was in the South. Early seventies. In the spirit of desegregation blacks were put into most of the upper level positions in the high school. It degraded to the point my parents sent me away to a private school for the last two years of my primary education. I heard there were rapes in the bathrooms and people stabbing others with forks in the cafeteria. There was one story about a girl being hit in the parking lot with a car; so hard that her  shoe flew over one hundred feet. Sad, really, for an environment where we knew nothing of color as children. I suppose it passed as progress, in its time.

                1. dianetrotter profile image75
                  dianetrotterposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                  I hope you won't feel offended.  This really sounds like the stereotype.  Blacks in the "upper level positions."  All administrators get the same training and are expected to meet the same requirements.  So the school went bad because of the administrators.  There are some adminisitrators that are not good - of all races.  I cannot imagine parents not complaining to the School Board.

                  This may be true for that particular school; however, it is not the rule.  That's why I asked which school.  Something that rose to this level should be in the newspaper (in 1970s).  That was all the ammunition white families would need to show that the administration needs to change.

                  Today, there are big problems in the inner city schools; however, the problem is usually not the educated Black people who have invested in their education and hold themselves to high standards.  Its the parents who realy should not be parents.  They send kids to school who are emotionally wounded from what they experience at home.  This would not have been true so much in the 70s because that was the time that the inner cities started declining.  It took a while before it impacted classrooms.

                  You probably don't mean it.  It sounds like Black people running the school made it a bad place to be.

                  1. Live to Learn profile image80
                    Live to Learnposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                    I'm not offended. I will say that the person put in the position of principle insisted he be called Doctor, although the fact that he didn't have a doctorate was well known. I remember our gym teacher. She made no bones about the fact that it was her intention to give all whites an A the first 6 weeks and all blacks a C. And then she was going to switch up the next six weeks.  It was all a big joke. You can certainly see it as stereotypical but having been there and seen it I can assure you it all happened. Anyway, it is in the past. The school system appears to have survived that era and is doing OK now.

                    I will say that your opinion of inner city schools sounds pretty stereotypical to me. Sounds like a cop out and a refusal to take responsibility for failures by the teaching staff.

  4. dianetrotter profile image75
    dianetrotterposted 7 weeks ago

    Credence, I thought you might want to see this.  Nat Turner narrative  https://www.loc.gov/resource/mesn.170/?sp=4

    1. Credence2 profile image83
      Credence2posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

      Interesting, Diane.

      I have to ask the question though, Nat Turner's revolt was in 1831. The woman spoke of the account as if she were actually living while it was going on. These interviews took place in the late 1930's. How could she possibly still be living well over 100 years after the event took place? Am I missing something? Perhaps this account was taken earlier, considerably earlier?

      1. dianetrotter profile image75
        dianetrotterposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

        I was surprised to find out how many slaves/former slaves lived to be more than 100.  Here is an 1860 census:  http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.anc … e100up.htm 

        I'm wondering if there was something in their culture, the way they lived, that made them live to be more than 100.

        It is quite difficult for me to understand some of the writings.

        1. wilderness profile image94
          wildernessposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

          "I'm wondering if there was something in their culture, the way they lived, that made them live to be more than 100."

          There probably was - hard work and tasteless, fat free food promote longer life, at least for those that get the necessary nutrients and don't work themselves to death.  Consider how many of the "oldest person alive" have been from lay-about, stuff-your-face cultures.

          1. dianetrotter profile image75
            dianetrotterposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

            Wilderness, Probably in Africa or wherever they came from, that ate what grew from the ground.  Not somuch after they arrived.

            Slave rations (when they had nice owners)
            Weekly food rations -- usually corn meal, lard, some meat, molasses, peas, greens, and flour -- were distributed every Saturday. Vegetable patches or gardens, if permitted by the owner, supplied fresh produce to add to the rations.

            http://www.pbs.org/wnet/slavery/experie … tory2.html 

            If you are ever in Fontana area, let me know.  I'll cook you some chitterlings and hog testicles.  I need plenty of time to clean out all of the suger honey iced tea!  They are really good fried.

            They had the ability to season crap well.  That's how we get Soul Food!

            1. Credence2 profile image83
              Credence2posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

              Wow, Diane if it were that easy, I could continue to eat my Wheaties and live past 125, which seems to be the natural limit of the human life span, currently. For this lady to make this report she would have to have been  a minimum of 110 years old and closer to 120. While it is possible, it is highly unlikely. The number of people on earth that are verified  are over 110 (supercentenarians), today, are about 150 verified up to 600

              I would not expose Wilderness to 'Soul Food' as it is an acquired taste................ big_smile

              1. wilderness profile image94
                wildernessposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                I spent 22 years in one of the poorer counties in Virginia, with about 90% black folks.  Yes, I've been exposed to chitterlings (once was enough, thank you).  Never hog testicles, but Rocky Mountain Oysters are popular where I live now. 

                I've also seen "chicken leg sandwiches" - a thigh and drumstick combo slapped between two greasy pieces of bread.  Ugh!  But okra, now - that's fine and I like grits.

                1. dianetrotter profile image75
                  dianetrotterposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                  OKRA!!!  Can't touch that!

                  After you cook your grits, whip a raw egg in it.  Yum!

                  You obviously didn't put hot sauce on the chitterlings.  I don't understand it.

                  1. wilderness profile image94
                    wildernessposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                    Might try the eggs/grits thing.  Sounds good!  But not the chitterlings (chitlins where I was).  No, thank you very much.

                2. Credence2 profile image83
                  Credence2posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                  I spent 22 years in one of the poorer counties in Virginia, with about 90% black folks.  Yes, I've been exposed to chitterlings (once was enough, thank you).  Never hog testicles, but Rocky Mountain Oysters are popular where I live now. 

                  I've also seen "chicken leg sandwiches" - a thigh and drumstick combo slapped between two greasy pieces of bread.  Ugh!  But okra, now - that's fine and I like grits.
                  ================================
                  Wilderness, how you be such a cool guy with all this experience and be so DAMNED conservative?

                  1. wilderness profile image94
                    wildernessposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                    It's real simple, actually.  I believe in freedom and I believe in responsibility for self, not an unlimited nanny state.

                    Cred, I doubt that even you can imagine what it was like for a 24 year old new college graduate from NE Oregon (one black family in the town) to move to Caroline County, Va, right between the capital and Richmond.  The bathrooms in the plant where I worked had just been desegregated the year before - in a plant only 2 years old!  Half the county had no running water.  Half our work force signed with an "x".  No women, even in the office, at my plant, and no woman's bathroom.  I helped one poor employee get Social Security - born along the road with no official record and given to a neighbor, then enlisted in the army at 15 by lying about his age made it virtually impossible to prove age.  Upon arrival I couldn't understand a word being said from any of the crew, black OR white - not a single one spoke the Kings English.  Was soon told to go to THIS bar, not THAT one, or I would come out with a shiv in the gut; THIS one was for blacks.  And don't go in the balcony at the movie theater - that was for blacks, too, and I'd come down over the edge instead of the stairs.

                    For a young college grad this was all from the 19th century.  Unheard of in modern, civilized society.  No running water or indoor bathroom, indeed!  Segregated bathrooms, bars and theater seating!  Birth in a wagon alongside the road - only in the wild west and only before 1900, not in the civilized East!  A very, very rude awakening to reality.

                3. ptosis profile image80
                  ptosisposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                  Looked at the Chitterlings pictures and looked disgusting but wait - I absolutely LOVE Dinuguan! And that has pig intestines in it.  When first ate it, said, "shut up, I'm hungry, don't tell me what it is." All the while I'm gobbling it up, he was smirking.  And yeah, every time ordered it down at Maunakea Mall I would always surprise them which my food choice.

                  Mmm, mmm , mmm with two scoops of white rice. The darker the sauce, the better it is.
                  http://reelandgrill.blogspot.com/2009/0 … ver-2.html


                  https://usercontent2.hubstatic.com/13680581.jpg

                  1. dianetrotter profile image75
                    dianetrotterposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                    I sure hope that's not a picture of chittlins!!!!  Whatever else you said may be displayed.  If that's true, it might be good.

              2. dianetrotter profile image75
                dianetrotterposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                When I worked in Westchester (LA), many white people wanted to, and did, go to Kizzy's Kitchen in Marina del Rey.  That was about 30 years ago.  Collard greens and fried chicken were the most popular items.

                I hadn't heard the term "soul food" until I came to California,  In Arkansas, it was the regular menu for eating places owned by colored people.  My family couldn't afford to go.  There actually weren't too many - hole in the wall kind of places.  If you've heard of 9th Street in Little Rock, that is where the Black businesses were.  urban renewal came through with the freeway and wiped the street out.

                The Rise and Fall of Little Rock's Ninth Street (KATV Exclusive)
                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zeSJDDDhICk

  5. jo miller profile image84
    jo millerposted 7 weeks ago

    This country was built on white supremacy.  We enslaved the blacks and slaughtered the natives.  Not a pretty beginning in all ways.  But some of those slave owners also wrote the Declaration of Independence and established a country where the constitution, belatedly for sure, gave rights to those who had once been enslaved.  We can rightfully look back at our country with both pride and shame.  All of us can do this if we choose. 

    I don't want your niece to forget.  I don't want to forget.  But we can forgive, if we choose, not by ignoring or denying our past but accepting it as part of our human condition.  We are all sinners and all worthy of forgiveness.  We are all a little bigoted at times.

    1. dianetrotter profile image75
      dianetrotterposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

      Amen Jo!!!

  6. Glenis Rix profile image87
    Glenis Rixposted 7 weeks ago

    Western society has made huge leaps in protecting human rights since the abolition of slavery (William Wilberforce was the front runner in the cause when his Bill was passed by the British Parliament in 1804). As Jo has said, the past cannot be changed but civilised society can learn valuable lessons on morality and ethics from history. The Western world is now waiting for less enlightened societies to catch up with us. But it seems that the strong will often attempt to prey on the weak. There was a case in the British press recently of a gang of immigrants to the UK who had been convicted of keeping people in slavery.  And, not a stone's throw from where I live, a gang of gipsy travellers have recently received prison sentences for similar offences.

    1. dianetrotter profile image75
      dianetrotterposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

      I like Jo's comments also.

      It is sad that people prey on others for financial reasons.  I've ready several articles and seen news stories on the sex slave trade.  Rich families bring in servants from other countries and then refuse to pay them or let them leave.  They scare the into working for nothing!

  7. ptosis profile image80
    ptosisposted 6 weeks ago

    Here is a very good video for people who don't understand what the fuss is all about the monuments.

    http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/20 … story.html

    Confederate Monuments Are Propaganda — Not History
    Donald Trump says removing monuments to the Confederacy would go down a slippery slope to removing monuments to all the Founders, and that history would be erased. Jonathan Chait explains why he’s wrong.

    1. dianetrotter profile image75
      dianetrotterposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

      Great explanation for anyone open to it!

      1. GA Anderson profile image83
        GA Andersonposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

        No, Diane, it is not a great explanation. It is one perspective, and one that is sensibly argued. Consider Eisenhower and Patton for just two examples. Are their statues and monuments "Northern" propaganda?

        Are only non-Southerners righteous to honor their military heroes? Who will determine what "historic accomplishments" will cover the taint of being a slave owner, (re. the Washington and Jefferson rationalization in the video), or association with the Confederacy?

        Is it fact that the corner stone of the Confederacy was the belief in the superiority of the white man over the black*, (ignoring the other very arguable statements of the Confederacy's legitimacy*), or is it just Jonathan Chait's, (the video's speaker), opinion?
        *there is a strongly supported school of thought that a big part of the succession movement was motivated by fear of dominance by the population density and industrial power of the North at that time.

        Take another look at the video, but this time view it with the perception that it is one man's opinion - not a factual recitation, and if you still think it is a great explanation, then that's fine too. It just means that you agree with his perspective - not that that perspective is the factual reality of the situation.

        One final thought... the condemnation of the Confederacy for wanting to split the Union... would you consider any comparison to our own revolutionary war to split away from Great Britain? How were the Revolutionaries any different in their belief of "right" than the Confederacy's belief in their "right?"

        GA

        1. dianetrotter profile image75
          dianetrotterposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

          GA, I don't consider it fact.  When there is a discussion, people give their points of view with supporting explanations.  That's how I consider the video.  He supported how he felt.  It is a fact that slavery existed and that slaveowners wanted to continue it.  I've read letters of former slaves who talked about the savage treatment of everyone on a plantation, stealing from them, throwing away what they didn't eat or take, etc. 

          It is a fact that I am glad slavery no longer exists.  I can't see any reason why I should honor what slaveowners, or those whose efforts included perpetuating slavery, did.

          What many of the union solders did was despicable and often as bad as the slaveowners.  The means didn't justify the end.  I am glad it ended the way it did.

          This is my opinion but the way i feel is factual to me.

          With no hate!

          1. GA Anderson profile image83
            GA Andersonposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

            Hi Diane, your explanation of your opinion that the video content was a "great explanation" is just as valid for you as my contrary opinion that there are legitimate perspectives that believe otherwise is for me.

            So the discussion continues ...

            How do you feel about non-Confederacy slave owner statues like Washington or Jefferson?

            The point of my question is not to the slavery issue, but to that cynical, but true, quip that "the victors get to write the history."

            My opinion is that Gen. Robert E. Lee was an honorable man that followed his heart and convictions, and was willing to fight and die for what he considered his homeland, not an evil slave owner just fighting to keep slavery alive.

            That was my point in offering post-slavery military examples. Slavery may be the focus of the controversy now, but I do not believe slavery. Is the entirety of the consideration.

            GA

            1. dianetrotter profile image75
              dianetrotterposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

              Perspective is personal.  The pig and chicken were talking about breakfast.  The family planned to have ham and eggs.  The chicken was tired of laying eggs.  The pig told the chicken to stop complaining.  The pig explained, "For you it is a contribution.  For me it is a total commitment."

              There was not threat of land being taken from the Confederacy.  Locations did not change.  George Wallace and Orval Faubus followed their heart and convictions to continue segregation.  Heart and convictions can be a big problem.

              I'm not sold one way or the other about rather statues should stay.  There is nothing wrong with having a civil discussion.  As far as naming buildings, I had no idea of how names were selected for buildings growing up.  It seems there were plenty of buildings and streets named for slaveowners and segregationist.  I almost said "and racists."  I wonder if there is a distinction between a "racist" and a "segregationist?"  Just a rhetorical thought!

              My point has always been that the heart is what matters.  I'm not concerned about Robert E. Lee's heart.  I'm concerned about the hearts of people living today.

            2. Credence2 profile image83
              Credence2posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

              GA, excuse me for interrupting, but I have a point or two to add to Diane's.

              So the discussion continues ...

              How do you feel about non-Confederacy slave owner statues like Washington or Jefferson?

              Of course, they should stay, their contributions to the founding of this nation supersedes the fact that they were both slaveholders. While I think that it is an exercise in futility to attempt to bring down all the monuments to heroes of the Confederacy,  you are left with this thought; it is difficult to truly put something behind you when it continues to stand before you.
              -----------------------------
              The point of my question is not to the slavery issue, but to that cynical, but true, quip that "the victors get to write the history."

              That may be true, but that does not preclude our right to question the interpretation of that history and take into consideration the source. I am well enough versed in the Civil War to have an appreciation of the history taking the account from both sides.
              --------------------------------

              My opinion is that Gen. Robert E. Lee was an honorable man that followed his heart and convictions, and was willing to fight and die for what he considered his homeland, not an evil slave owner just fighting to keep slavery alive.

              GA, people are multifaceted, Lee could have been both an honorable man and an evil slave owner just fighting to keep slavery alive. As to which side becomes more important depends on your perspective. He was 'honorable' as long as the fortunes of black folks or slaves are not considered.  I am just ticked by people who try to tell me that he could be both an humanitarian and a slaveholder. There were plenty of contemporaries of his that would, as a minimum,  not hold slaves, even if they were not abolitionists. Only they are fit to wear the title 'humanitarian'.

              But, the big picture of promoting your economic interests at the expense of others seems to be an all encompassing theme. That is part of the dark cloud that hangs over race relations today, although so many just want to consign it to the past and dismiss its contribution as to why we are what we are today.  Lee did not rise above the mindset of the slaver. If he had, I would have had to see him in a more favorable light. 
              ------------------------------
              That was my point in offering post-slavery military examples. Slavery may be the focus of the controversy now, but I do not believe slavery. Is the entirety of the consideration.

              What was your point here?

              1. GA Anderson profile image83
                GA Andersonposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

                Hi Cred, your point about "...it is difficult to truly put something behind you when it continues to stand before you. " is the crux of my points; My perspective is that  there is more to most of the statues than just a representation of slavery, yours seems to be it is all about slavery. Of course even though I think my perspective is the more correct one, there are no grounds for me to declare yours to be wrong - only that I think it's narrowness is misguided.

                For me, your rationalization for the Founder's statues seems to validate my point. Where do you place the bar for acceptability? Washington and Jefferson are the obvious, but what someone like Pinckney?

                That is also the final point that you questioned in my previous response. Even though it is understandable that slavery is the only issue represented by the statues - to some, I don't believe that constrriction should carry a national agenda of removal.

                GA

                1. Credence2 profile image83
                  Credence2posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

                  Hi Cred, your point about "...it is difficult to truly put something behind you when it continues to stand before you. " is the crux of my points; My perspective is that  there is more to most of the statues than just a representation of slavery, yours seems to be it is all about slavery.

                  Thank you.....

                  Maybe directly, but indirectly they continue to point to slavery and it implies a certain remorse about its eradication. How do you look at any of the statues to military men of the Confederacy and not know or appreciate what it was that they fought for and why they are revered, to the point that folks will fight to keep them there? What do consider to be the "more" to the statues than a representation of slavery? If you please, educate me about the 'broad view'? And lets be honest and cut to the chase, something as drastic as Ft. Sumter  at the time and place it did occur would not have never occurred over tariffs, states rights, etc. Even Andrew Jackson made it clear about the unacceptability of secession even as he was a slave owner himself when the issue came up 30 years before Ft. Sumter.  The South's fear of being consumed in an economic way relative to the North was staved off by slavery. Of course, it is the elephant in the room, despite revisionists trying to tell us all otherwise.

                  Even Nazism can be said to have had some positive effects on the German people and its economy. Where do I find statues to Joseph Goebbels, Erwin Rommel, for example? When I see their likenesses carved into stone, what would be the first thought that would enter your mind, that the Third Reich be given credit for making sure that the trains ran on time?

                  =============================================
                  Of course even though I think my perspective is the more correct one, there are no grounds for me to declare yours to be wrong - only that I think it's narrowness is misguided.

                  Considering you as a rational human, I would like to see your perspective more directly and understand how and why you come to it?
                  ===========================================
                  For me, your rationalization for the Founder's statues seems to validate my point. Where do you place the bar for acceptability? Washington and Jefferson are the obvious, but what someone like Pinckney?

                  That is also the final point that you questioned in my previous response. Even though it is understandable that slavery is the only issue represented by the statues - to some, I don't believe that constrriction should carry a national agenda of removal.

                  Interesting question, but because you make a good point, I don't advocate removal for any of the statues at this point. But, if it gives people an incentive to find out just who these men were outside of the carved stone likeness and to learn a little history as to why they are considered heroes or demonized, consider it a job well done. And perhaps through all this they can understand that in many ways, the Civil War is still being fought today.

                  1. GA Anderson profile image83
                    GA Andersonposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

                    Damn it Cred! A Nazi comparison? I learned to stop beating my head against a brick wall a long time ago.

                    GA

        2. Credence2 profile image83
          Credence2posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

          No, Diane, it is not a great explanation. It is one perspective, and one that is sensibly argued. Consider Eisenhower and Patton for just two examples. Are their statues and monuments "Northern" propaganda?

          Eisenhower and Patton are AMERICAN military heroes, northern and southern designations are irrelevant.
          ===============================================

          Are only non-Southerners righteous to honor their military heroes? Who will determine what "historic accomplishments" will cover the taint of being a slave owner, (re. the Washington and Jefferson rationalization in the video), or association with the Confederacy?

          Because of the questionable yardstick you present regarding historic accomplishment relative to being a slave owner, I said that it is OK for the statues to remain as long as people know who these men actually were. I consider the Confederacy a lost cause, and not a good one. The United States has a federal government and had one in 1860, the Articles of Confederation have long been shelved. Therefore, secession was illegal and if it were permitted to what extent would this nation have been balkanized today because of it? States seceding from the Union, counties seceding from States. I recall speaking to you about parts of Eastern Colorado that wanted to create its own state because they had issues with relatively liberal Denver and much of the Front Range. So where does it stop? We don't even have to mention Slavery to find the Confederacy at fault.
          ==============================
          Is it fact that the corner stone of the Confederacy was the belief in the superiority of the white man over the black*, (ignoring the other very arguable statements of the Confederacy's legitimacy*), or is it just Jonathan Chait's, (the video's speaker), opinion?

          Of course, for me "Is it fact that the corner stone of the Confederacy was the belief in the superiority of the white man over the black" is certainly enough to condemn them in my eyes and that of any truly reasonable, human being, regardless of race.
          =======================================================

          *there is a strongly supported school of thought that a big part of the succession movement was motivated by fear of dominance by the population density and industrial power of the North at that time.

          There is some credibility here, by 1860 there were 19 free states to 15 slave states. They were on the losing end here.  But the trend for a couple more free states over slave states was the case in the 1840's. So, why was Lincoln the powder keg when he did not threaten the institution as it existed? Part of their compensational advantage was Slavery, where they could add to their population and representation with warm bodies that had no other rights. So, here comes slavery again as the cause, front and center.
          ============================
          One final thought... the condemnation of the Confederacy for wanting to split the Union... would you consider any comparison to our own revolutionary war to split away from Great Britain? How were the Revolutionaries any different in their belief of "right" than the Confederacy's belief in their "right?"

          Of course, the 4 million slaves and their desires were never even considered

          1. GA Anderson profile image83
            GA Andersonposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

            Hi Cred, your point about secession being illegal, and the potential "balkanizations' that could follow is one I can understand. My point wasn't about the legality, wisdom, or worthiness of the Confederacy's secession - it was only about what would have been in the heart's of Southern heroes like Gen. Lee.

            You are familiar with Lee's  long "Union" service, and his, and history writer's explanation of why he abandoned the Union to fight for his "native land." Would you consider his motives so different from our patriots of the Revolutionary war?

            Now hold on a minute... I am not equating the Confederacy's cause with our Revolutionary cause , and I am certainly not supporting the Confederacy's cause. What I am discussing is the motivations of a military leader like Gen. Lee. I do not think I can be persuaded that his actions and motivations were purely, (or even primarily), for the cause of slavery.

            GA

            1. Credence2 profile image83
              Credence2posted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

              Hi Cred, your point about secession being illegal, and the potential "balkanizations' that could follow is one I can understand. My point wasn't about the legality, wisdom, or worthiness of the Confederacy's secession - it was only about what would have been in the heart's of Southern heroes like Gen. Lee.

              I know, there has been nothing but praise as to his resourcefulness and his stature as a soldier. I don't dismiss any of that. I do not demonize the man, just saying that the flaws that he did have would naturally rise front and center for me. But, it may not be true for others not having my background. Gen Lee was merely typical of his era and I can't apply 21st century socio/political values to a man that lived in the 19th century. But even Frederick Douglass at Abe Lincoln's passing, commented that Lincoln was  tardy in the appreciation of the meaning of full Civil rights for the Freeman, but he was a considerable improvement over what came before and more than a step or two above his contemporaries at the time in the appreciation of the issues at hand.
              ===============================

              You are familiar with Lee's  long "Union" service, and his, and history writer's explanation of why he abandoned the Union to fight for his "native land." Would you consider his motives so different from our patriots of the Revolutionary war?

              I understand but the 'native land' should be the Union and not any particular state. That is commendable, Lee's loyalty to Virginia but there were plenty of Southern men as part of the US Army that  reaffirmed their support of the Union.
              ----------------------------------------------
              Now hold on a minute... I am not equating the Confederacy's cause with our Revolutionary cause , and I am certainly not supporting the Confederacy's cause. What I am discussing is the motivations of a military leader like Gen. Lee. I do not think I can be persuaded that his actions and motivations were purely, (or even primarily), for the cause of slavery.

              No, I agree I don't think that maintenance of Slavery was his prime motivation, but obviously the moral implications of the Peculiar Institution was only of incidental significance in his allegiance to Virginia and the Confederacy.

              1. GA Anderson profile image83
                GA Andersonposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

                Although I can see that it might appear so Cred, my intention was not to praise Lee, or his decisions, but to point out that he was an apt example of a military hero that, in my opinion, should first symbolize the same attributes that our other military heroes, like Eisenhower or Patton, do.

                GA

                1. Credence2 profile image83
                  Credence2posted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

                  The only problem is that he fought for a losing side, not many military leaders from any losing side receive a great deal of adoration..... I have heard rave reviews about Yamamoto, but alas....

                  1. GA Anderson profile image83
                    GA Andersonposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

                    Damn, and now I can't even complain about my headache.

                    GA

              2. wilderness profile image94
                wildernessposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

                "I understand but the 'native land' should be the Union and not any particular state."

                Isn't that much like saying George Washington's "native land" was England?  That IS the country he was born into, after all, just as Lee was born into the Union.  A union that, by his lights, decided to turn his homeland, his culture and his livelihood on it's head and destroy it.

  8. Castlepaloma profile image28
    Castlepalomaposted 4 weeks ago

    Hi Diane

    Built a pirate museum in St. Petersburg Fl. One display was of Christpher Columbus as a pirate. Columbus was the first European to start slavery, piracy, gold rush and Christianity. Christianity has been the most common thread throughout human history that justified salvery in the Americas. Now where would history be, if history was written where Jesus was more likely to be black or even brown.

    There was a man, who was so impressed with my museum work, he wanted me to build the first black America history museum.  I said, oh!!! no no just finish getting hell from building Columbus as a pirate. My problem building a black history museum is,  that I am white.

    The upside, is there has been many bright positive changes for black people in my short life time. Compared to maybe the worst genocide in human history, black salvery and imprisonment.

    I say the two most common threads to happiness is about your health and what you can forget.

    Tear down Gen. Lee and Columbus statue. They are not good memories for all.

    What dose Trump has to say about tearing down statues, he has plans to tear down statues of liberity. That is a keeper, even though she is not a 10.

    Let's build something bigger and better. Never will sculpt a Columbus again, unless it's in the name of comedy.

    1. dianetrotter profile image75
      dianetrotterposted 4 weeks agoin reply to this

      It must be fun going around building things of significance.

      As I build my family tree, I find out more about how towns, buildings and streets were named.  Many were named after slave owners.  Many of the schools and other public buildings were named after slave owners and racists.  We never had any civic lessons or history lessons on the naming of loations so no one knew about the naming.

      I am less hung up on the dedications now than I was @ the beginning of the debate about moving statues.  What's more significant is that the descendants of the slaves are now able to enter institutions where Black people were once denied.

      Many Black people have gone on to get more education and have more success than those who tried to hold them back.

      Let the monuments stay.  There was a song back in the early 70's, "No Matter How Hard You Try You Can't Stop Me Now!"  Ivana Trump advised, "Don't get even!  Get everything!"  I say, "Get even by getting educated!"  We need to go back to the passionate vision that parents had as they encouraged their children to get education.

      Education will trump ignorance and hatred every time!

      1. Castlepaloma profile image28
        Castlepalomaposted 4 weeks agoin reply to this

        Keep giving out the love however it maybe. I keep giving my love to Trump anyways because soon enough, people will figure out who the real a**hole is.

        1. dianetrotter profile image75
          dianetrotterposted 4 weeks agoin reply to this

          I believe God allowed him to be president for America to examine ourselves.  Our topics would surely be different if HRC had become president.

          He definitely keeps things exciting.

          1. Castlepaloma profile image28
            Castlepalomaposted 4 weeks agoin reply to this

            I will give Trump something more than love, because he needs more love than anybody.  He is also my favorite comedian.

            Steve Hawkings says to the Pope.
            Humans need to move to another planet to save themselves.
            Then Pope says aliens are our savior. Hawkings says aliens will cattle us to eat us as cruel as we humans are to our own earthlings.

            Since religion has the monopoly on emotions and whites have the monopoly on nuclear weapons. Trump may blow his top. Making Bolivia my best and affordable lifetime investment.

            1. dianetrotter profile image75
              dianetrotterposted 4 weeks agoin reply to this

              I'll check Bolivia out.

  9. Live to Learn profile image80
    Live to Learnposted 4 weeks ago

    I'm going to throw this out to everyone. Watched it yesterday and it was interesting. By Thomas Sowell. I'm sure at least one among us will chime in with an 'Uncle Tom' reference but, I'm throwing it out there anyway.


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7gN2EYbtgM

    The take away I got from this is that the American slaves did a great service to humanity. By being 'different' it seems that people here were finally able to look at the institution of slavery square in the face and understand it was wrong. A long time before other parts of the world came to an agreement on that.

 
working