What is with this statues and PC stuff? Enough is Enough!

Jump to Last Post 1-5 of 5 discussions (65 posts)
  1. Credence2 profile image81
    Credence2posted 13 months ago

    I saw an article's recently about protesters bringing down the statue to Francis Scott Key in San Francisco.

    They said that he was a slave holder and a slavery advocate, but let's face it, everybody who was anybody during the late 18th and first half of the 19th centuries owned slaves.

    If this is the standard then The monuments to George Washington and Thomas Jefferson should come down as well. But, I recognize these men for their achievements beyond the negative aspects of their owning slaves.

    The only statues that should come down from the public square and be relegated to a museum are the ones heralding heroes of the Confederacy. Jefferson Davis, Robert E. Lee, etc., should not be honored as fomenting the insurrection and supporting a slave holding society. Do we have statues to the Kaiser, Tojo, Hitler or Mussolini?

    Some of this has gone too far, removing "Eskimo" from Eskimo Pie.  I had no more problem with Aunt Jemima on the pancake box even though her hairstyle is a bit dated, but she certainly does not look like "MAmmy" from "Gone With the Wind". I have no reason to see her as any different from the likeness of Betty Crocker who I have seen around for years.

    I am a promoter of the liberal left and am and will continue to remain the nemesis of Rightwinger and conservatives, generally. But, enough is enough.

    These are merely time wasting diversions from the fundamental problems that lie at the foundation of the both the protests and this society in general, of which those satisfied with addressing only the superficial unwittingly play a role in supporting.

    1. wilderness profile image96
      wildernessposted 13 months agoin reply to this

      "If this is the standard then The monuments to George Washington and Thomas Jefferson should come down as well."

      They already have: 
      https://time.com/5856329/washington-sta … -portland/
      https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/202 … chool.html

      Leftwinger liberals are alive and well, destroying the history of our country.  Good or bad doesn't seem to matter; it is an excuse for destruction.  Just as tearing down statues of one of the greatest generals in history - Robert E Lee - or anyone else from ancient history that doesn't agree with their modern concepts of how to control people.

      1. Credence2 profile image81
        Credence2posted 13 months agoin reply to this

        So, Erwin Rommel was a great general, do we honor him with a statue?

        This idea of the "lost cause" as represented and supported by Lee, is as General Grant said was the worse reason for anyone to fight.

        Those involved in rebellion and insurrection against the U.S. do not deserved to be revered in the public square, IMHO.

        1. wilderness profile image96
          wildernessposted 13 months agoin reply to this

          I don't have any memories of Rommel being an American general - sufficient reason not to honor him.  We don't have statues for hardly any foreign people, and those that we DO have are not for people fighting our country.

          I understand the excuse of rebellion and insurrection, but also think that our civil war was a very special case.  It's not like a few hundred people rebelled; we're talking half the country and that does make a difference.  IMO, of course.

          1. crankalicious profile image94
            crankaliciousposted 13 months agoin reply to this

            Personally, I don't think any statues should be brought down. It's much better to teach people about the past than to obliterate it. These statues should not be celebrated, but they could easily stand with plaques explaining the good and the bad. They could easily be moved to a museum if necessary.

            That said, the cause of these acts isn't the objective evil of the people committing the acts, but anger called by years of injustice. Still, there's a line being drawn here that's not sustainable. It's political correctness gone very, very wrong.

        2. Ken Burgess profile image88
          Ken Burgessposted 13 months agoin reply to this

          This is a fair view and I think a majority of people today would agree with this.

          But we are not seeing just Civil War statues being demolished, we are seeing Thomas Jefferson being torn down and Theodore Roosevelt being removed as well.

          Removed from buildings and streets and their contributions being rewritten in the history books... so that they are people to be ashamed of and despised, which in turn invalidates any of the good they have done, which invalidates the Bill of Rights and the Constitution.

          There is a method to the madness, there are ultimate goals that are being worked towards.

          More troubling however, than the rewriting of history and the removal of respect for our founding fathers and their accomplishments, is waht is occurring on our Campuses of Higher Education.

          I have written much about how China has surpassed us, Industrially, Scientifically, and with STEM graduates and STEM higher learning focus.

          In contrast, our schools and movements such as #shutdownSTEM (a partner movement to BLM) work to cripple this Nation's future in leading STEM advances.

          See the below video around the 15 min mark for further explanation.


          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10XYi6E2QpI

          1. crankalicious profile image94
            crankaliciousposted 13 months agoin reply to this

            You seem to be implying that #shutdownSTEM is a movement aimed at removing science from the curriculum somehow. I did not find any evidence at all that such is the case. All I found was that it's meant to be a day where STEM sciences support the cause of racial equality and pause to consider injustice and making academia more inclusive.

            What is perhaps limiting our advancement in STEM sciences is the underfunding of education at all levels due to Republican opposition to such funding.

            Conservative opposition to scientific inquiry and science as a concept also probably doesn't help. President Trump has treated science as a joke. Such attitudes rub off.

          2. Tim Truzy info4u profile image97
            Tim Truzy info4uposted 13 months agoin reply to this

            Be careful when you mention China surpassing us - many administrations, including Trump's, have pointed to the nation as engaging in theft at many levels. China's success is not all gained through sweat and tears, according to our government.

            1. Ken Burgess profile image88
              Ken Burgessposted 13 months agoin reply to this

              China is in a position to advance beyond where America is today.

              I would say China is superior to America in terms of population control and focus of its citizens to national goals and ideals.

              It is superior to America in terms of Industrial capability and technological advancements.

              It is ramping up military production far in excess of what America is producing now, and will have superior ships, jets, missiles, etc. within the next 5 years, with a number total being superior to America.

              It is another misconception whenever someone mentions America spends so much more in military spending than China. 

              America is maintaining an expensive force, America spends ten times the amount that China does for every Jet built or Ship commissioned, America is maintaining forces across the globe and is in more than one ongoing conflict.

              The money China is putting into its military is going to new Battlecruisers and Aircraft carriers, Jets and Anti-Aircraft missiles, and they are pouring billions into advancing their technology, AI, and Internet/ Satellite capabilities.

              I don't see how America doesn't capitulate its position as global leader to China in the not too distant future... similar to how past "empires" have faded into the background, like Spain did hundreds of years in the past, now its America/England that will fade to a minor player in the decades ahead.

              1. crankalicious profile image94
                crankaliciousposted 13 months agoin reply to this

                As I have said before, Ken, your opinion on China is something I agree with. They are a serious problem. It's a shame that Trump has merely morphed into another of their puppets.

                I just wish your posts weren't dotted with so many falsehoods, like that #shutdownSTEM thing, which seems to be fairly innocent and is not some grand conspiracy to debilitate our science education.

                1. Ken Burgess profile image88
                  Ken Burgessposted 13 months agoin reply to this

                  Yes I believe I wrote #antiSTEM I meant  #shutdownSTEM

                  Science is not racist, or sexist, however there are groups within the LEFT that are crusading against Science on a false belief that it is.

                  Its that simple.

                  If you believe there are 50 different sexes, and science says no there are only 2 (3 at best) and that theory/belief is disproven by science... then science is the enemy of that belief.

                  Despite great efforts of the last 10-20 years of trying to shift teaching and perspectives to the needs of females (60% of college students), and making grants and scholarships available, women are no more inclined to pursue Science than they had been a decade ago... that does not make STEM fields sexist.  The opportunity is there, they just aren't interested.

                  This explains the 'official' version of #shutdownSTEM

                  https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/06 … lack-lives

                  The movement of #shutdownSTEM like the movement of BLM has deeper goals, it will be expanded upon as it gains traction, to the detriment to all STEM fields.

              2. Tim Truzy info4u profile image97
                Tim Truzy info4uposted 13 months agoin reply to this

                Apple, IBM, and others, threatening to pull their factories out of China because of theft. Population control through centralized government, telling people when and where they can have children, (boat rammed by Chinese military off coast of Vietnam, June 10, 2020, India and China engage in minor military fight leaving 43 Chinese soldiers dead and 20 Indian soldiers dead, China seized an African port militarily shocking the region, millions of Muslims imprisoned without due process - No, China still has much to prove - did I mention that little virus that took off from there from a wet market, or is that forgotten?

                1. Ken Burgess profile image88
                  Ken Burgessposted 13 months agoin reply to this

                  You are trying to say that it has much to prove... by Western Standards.

                  Western Standards don't matter... EU & North America are fast tracking their decline.  Asia (China, Japan, Korea) are the dominant players of the future.

                  None of those countries care about Western Standards, they don't care about Diversity (in fact it is all but illegal in their countries).

                  Apple, IBM etc.  can pull out... it doesn't matter Chinese, Korean, and Japanese products dominate outside of North America.

                  Minor skirmishes along its border as it takes control of more regions is no different than America's Manifest Destiny, infact its very similar... in that China is expanding its control and sphere of influence much like America was doing during its growth to dominance.

                  You are looking at all the wrong things, and you are looking at things through Western sensibilities which do not matter.... because the West will no longer be dictating to the world what matters, China (and Asia overall) will.

            2. Tim Truzy info4u profile image97
              Tim Truzy info4uposted 13 months agoin reply to this

              And Ken, China openly wishes to be like the West. They have said that many times. But China's in trouble, they have made high risks loans and may not be able to collect.

              1. Ken Burgess profile image88
                Ken Burgessposted 13 months agoin reply to this

                Actually they made those loans with the knowledge that those countries would not be able to pay... and to offset those debts, they took control of the ports and airfields they built.

                China used debt to consolidate its positions all along their primary oceanic trade routes.

                I have nothing but respect for what China has done, in a span shorter than my lifetime they have gone from a nation with a much smaller GDP than Hong Kong had... to being the greatest economic force on the planet.

                I know what their goals are... and that is not to become a self-critical self-loathing culture that we see in the West today.  They have more in common with the Third Reich than they do Western Civilization... and woe to any foolish enough not to recognize this fact.

                1. Tim Truzy info4u profile image97
                  Tim Truzy info4uposted 13 months agoin reply to this

                  " They have more in common with the Third Reich than they do Western Civilization... and woe to any foolish enough not to recognize this fact."
                  Exactly the reason China is not a country to be admired. Remember: What happened to the Third Reich? You made my point for me. Self-hating is not in my description of the West. Hey, but roll with your world, man.

                  1. Ken Burgess profile image88
                    Ken Burgessposted 13 months agoin reply to this

                    Stating that China is at a position today where it can blow by America in the years ahead, is not the same as saying they are "to be admired".

                    I respect what they have done, but I also recognize the threat that they present to our economy and our position in the world.

                    Considering the state of our current affairs and politics, we will not  properly address the growing power of China or prepare for what is to come.

                    "What happened to the Third Reich?"

                    It was a small nation that chose to make enemies of all its neighbors, China is a large nation with a huge population and more allies than enemies at it's borders.

                    "Self-hating is not my description of the west"

                    Yeah none of that going on here, no riots, no tearing down of statues, no infighting political extremism... all rosey here in America and elsewhere.

    2. savvydating profile image92
      savvydatingposted 13 months agoin reply to this

      I am surprised you did not mention that protesters also took down the statue of General Grant. But, I agree that enough is enough.

      1. Credence2 profile image81
        Credence2posted 13 months agoin reply to this

        I wasn't aware that Ulysses Grant, his statue, was a target. I certainly would not be a party to such a thing no more than I would bring down Eisenhower or MacArthur. I have no issue with General Grant, his statue can stay.

    3. Ken Burgess profile image88
      Ken Burgessposted 13 months agoin reply to this

      Never have you typed a more accurate paragraph.

      I have been trying to convey this myself, the problem is not one of racism, it is one of economics. While there are individuals who are racists, or individuals who are intent on harming others... it is just that, individuals and not systemic.

      Or perhaps I should say, not systemic towards any minority group, but rather towards the poor.

      The Clip below from about minute ten (10:00) onward for ten minutes or so explains the problems we are dealing with, where they stem from, and why this leaderless "movement" is meandering without any true purpose.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NR7gDJGFW5A

      1. Credence2 profile image81
        Credence2posted 13 months agoin reply to this

        It is a problem of both economics AND racism. From "Central Park" Karen to the cop killer of George Floyd, I think racism is part of the American DNA, rather than the exception. I think far too many fall back on it when it is convienient or they are under some stress as just another tool in the tool box of white supremacy. Of course, they are not going to make the tool readily known.

        Sorry, that is how I see things. While there is always hope, the need for
        Continuous confrontation and struggle is evident.

        I saw the link, I am not interested in chaos, but I have no confidence in the Conservative Right and the status quo to seriously address the issues of concern, either. I want change and reform through our current system and will only enthusiastically support candidates that work toward that end, and NONE of them come from the Right.

        1. Ken Burgess profile image88
          Ken Burgessposted 13 months agoin reply to this

          I think talk of white supremacy is something people fall back on when it is convenient or they are simply devoid of facts and understanding.

          You really should watch those video clips, the information the Professor puts out is truly inciteful and accurate.

          One of the topics he spoke of was how racism was still a factor (not in the way you are talking about...bad cops and idiotic Karens would not keep entire communities of people stuck in poverty without opportunity).

          He defined it well, Racism is NOT systemic in the way you think or believe it to be.  It is systemic because it is more oppressive than ever to those who are poor.

          In the past when things were systemically racist, this created poor communities, and this was exacerbated by what has occured over the last 30 years.

          What happened over the last 30 years... the Professor touched on this as well, and correctly noted that the Democrats during the Clinton Administration abandoned the American workers for the Corporations, in essence becoming the Republicans while pretending for years to be fighting for the workers and minorities.

          Meanwhile they passed NAFTA, rescinded the Glass & Steagall Act, all the things that led to massive job loss and the Industrial might of the country departing for Canada, Mexico, etc. and the repeal of Glass Steagall was what allowed the Mortgage Crisis to cripple the economy in 2008.

          Ultimately a great swath of white workers were shifted from the working middle class, to the poor, over the last 30 years... while the poor (of which the majority were black) communities suffered continuously without hope or opportunity for a better life.

          And this is where we are at... the system isn't specifically racist against blacks today... it is against ALL AMERICANS from  lower-middle to poor.

          And all this BLM, #antiSTEM, LGBTQ, the riots, the protests, the occupations... all unfocused rage... poor people taking it out on other poor people because of race, gender, political ideology.

          And the politicians that sold the American people out... many of them are still in DC reaping their rewards for the betrayal... people like Pelosi, Biden, Schumer, all with over 30 years in DC.

          The Republicans... they were always on the side of business, they were always on the side of Corporations and Wall St.

          The betrayal, and the subjugation of the people to live in what is becoming a socialist slave state right before our eyes, was done by the Democratic Party.

          And there is no cure for it, certainly not in the senile Biden or the corrupt crony system propping him up as the alternative to Trump. 

          When the system collapses because so many cling to race ideological politics that mask far more subversive elements, rather than focusing on a broken and corrupt government system in need of being cleansed... when the people turn on one another believing the are creating a 'Revolution', based on race and reparations... the system has won, and the elite 1% will control all, and any that state the truth will be slandered as racist, sexist or whatever label they choose to make them a social pariah and unable to find employment anywhere... a non-person.

          And a version of China's Communist Party and its Social Credit System will be alive and well here in America... The United Socialist States of America... beholden to International Regulations, Courts and Currency.

          I believe you and I will be alive to see it all happen, just needs a couple more years for what has begun to be completed.

    4. Tim Truzy info4u profile image97
      Tim Truzy info4uposted 13 months agoin reply to this

      I haven't seen anything about the removal of statues to Grant. But I think they should put more statues of Sherman up, right beside Lee, to remind Americans who kicked who's butt.
      The Founding Fathers are a unique case. They put this country together; they should be honored. Get rid of those statues of those who sought to tear it apart.

      1. Credence2 profile image81
        Credence2posted 13 months agoin reply to this

        I concur, while Lee was a great general he fought for the wrong side, the side responsible for over one half million casualties.

        A way of life does not and cannot include my right to live free  is unacceptable. The antibellum South was a cauldron waiting to spill over.

        Southerners after the war talked about States Rights, the right to disenfranchise people based on race and color, the right to allow extralegal executions of people of color. Conservatives seem to be attracted to these things, is it any wonder why there  are few black conservatives?

        Some have selective memories about the past, the Rightwinger wants to revise the Civil War period as one to protect a state's Rights, minimizing the contribution of slavery in the mix. There is a determination for certain people to absolve themselves of blame and responsibility for,the abysmal behavior during the period.

        1. GA Anderson profile image91
          GA Andersonposted 13 months agoin reply to this

          "There is a determination for certain people to absolve themselves of blame and responsibility for,the abysmal behavior during the period."

          So it sounds like you are saying white folks are guilty because of their skin color. Since none of us were around when our slavery existed, what else could you mean?

          Is that really what you are saying, that I might be one of those that want to absolve myself of blame because I am white?

          GA

        2. Sharlee01 profile image84
          Sharlee01posted 13 months agoin reply to this

          "Some have selective memories about the past, the Rightwinger wants to revise the Civil War period as one to protect a state's Rights, minimizing the contribution of slavery in the mix. There is a determination for certain people to absolve themselves of blame and responsibility for, the abysmal behavior during the period.'

          How many years can you blame generation after generation for the sins of people that lived hundreds of years ago? When does it become an excuse instead of a cause for the plight of black citizens? In my view, innate discrimination is still visible our society but has much improved over the past 50 years. Is there work to do, oh yes.

          "There is a determination for certain people to absolve themselves of blame and responsibility for, the abysmal behavior during the period."

          I think you're kidding yourself to think that many today blame themselves for the sins of people that lived hundreds of years ago. I would think many look at slavery as a crime of those that have been dead over 200 years. A sad part of our history. I can only speak for myself, I hold no responsibility for slavery, or do I hold any guilt. I do feel it is my responsibility to lead my own life treating others as I hoped to be treated.

          I actually feel it would be those on the left that may be apologetic for slavery, and even might hope to absolve themselves of blame and responsibility for, the abysmal behavior during the period. They tend to see things very differently than those on the right. 

          Feelings of guilt and apologies certainly have not worked out to well in regard to solving racial problems thus far.

          1. Credence2 profile image81
            Credence2posted 13 months agoin reply to this

            "Some have selective memories about the past, the Rightwinger wants to revise the Civil War period as one to protect a state's Rights, minimizing the contribution of slavery in the mix. There is a determination for certain people to absolve themselves of blame and responsibility for, the abysmal behavior during the period.',

            Let me rephrase that:

            Of course those living toady are not responsible for what happened 2 centuries ago. But, I don't like the attitude that although it happened there has not been residual effects from it that resonates today. The Right says it now even-Steven, we all have attained to a post racial society. Fifty years is not very long to get a handhold on something the majority has never had taken. Years of talent and billions of dollars were stolen, opportunities lost over decades of time. So, while you cannot be held personally responsible, I resent the idea that this reality is treated as non existent and that it is a figment of left wing thought and that the problem that remains is solely our own. Instead of excusing it, let start by admiting that these events did in fact occur.



            And it is obvious that we have QUITE a way to go on this journey toward improvement, all I have to do is read the headlines.....

            1. Ken Burgess profile image88
              Ken Burgessposted 13 months agoin reply to this

              They happened, and now what?

              Are the families of the hundreds of thousands that fought and died to end Slavery going to pay for what a few States in the South were allowed to do?

              What about all the States that didn't even exist then (literally more than half the country) what's their part in it?

              White Americans (including White Hispanics) constitute the historical and current majority of the people living in the United States, with 72% of the population identifying as white in the 2010 United States Census. Non-Hispanic whites totaled about 197,181,177 or 60.4% of the U.S. population.

              So in 2020 I would say whitey is lucky if he is still above 50% of the population, non-white-hispanics not included.

              Less than 1% of that is what I would say today counts as "RICH" there are only 630,000 households in America with a net worth of over 10 million dollars (including home equity).

              That means the rest of whitey is working middle-class to poor.

              The poverty rate for blacks is double that of whites... but in today's world of economic unrest and job loss... the difference between working-class and poor have never been slimmer.  With more people falling into the poor category every year since they passed NAFTA and started the free flow of jobs and corporations out of the US.

              1. Credence2 profile image81
                Credence2posted 13 months agoin reply to this

                "They happened, and now what?"

                Well, it's a good start, they say that confession is good for the soul. So now, we can dispense with the lies and attempts of mitigating the facts regarding this matter

                It is a crime for the entire nation and everybody profited from it, the North included.  The only real victims whose work and efforts made others wealthy were the slaves.

                Why are you so nervous about the upcoming demographic changes?

                There is a big difference between having a net worth of 10 million dollars verses (the rest)being working middle class or poor. What about the large swath in between. I will have to study the percentage of blacks that are financially classified  as above working middle class or poor, yet are not worth 10 million dollars relative to the rest of the population...

                The poverty rate for Blacks is twice that of Whites, living in the same society and culture. Why does so great a disparity continue to exist in a "post racial" America?

                I will agree with you that working class and poor are morphing into one. NAFTA or no NAFTA, within a capitalist system like this one any business would have no problem relocating to where labor is less expensive and regulations less onerous. Why wouldn't they?The corporate class could care less about nationalism and patriotism, it is and has always been about the "bottom line". Once the technology and logistics were in place, what we see now had to be considered as inevitable.

                1. Ken Burgess profile image88
                  Ken Burgessposted 13 months agoin reply to this

                  I would tell you what you can do with that perception/perspective but I am sure it would be considered quite offensive.

                  I know my families history going back quite a few generations, French Canucks on one side and Capers on the other none had anything to do with Slavery, and that goes for probably 90%+ of all whiteys in America today.

                  I have no respect for any self-flagellating whitey who believes they are guilty for all the world's ills, they deserve whatever oppression that comes to them... I am not one of them.

                  I was listening to Bob Woodson today, he discussed how history proves progressivism has hurt the black community and how his 1776 Unites Campaign uses culture and history to counter the 1619 Project’s lies.

                  https://woodsoncenter.org/

                  He talked about how from the 1920s-1940s when blacks were discriminated against, it didn't cause their communities to fail... their communities developed their own banks, businesses, and schools.

                  He talked about how Sears donated billions to a program to help develop their school systems so that they were equal or better to many white school systems.

                  He talked about a truth... facts... that black communities may have been discriminated against by whites, but they were better off then than they are today... after progressivism, desegregation, and this fall back on racism promoted by BLM and the concept that their has to be reciprocation for past wrongs... generations ago.

                  This is exactly what those with all the money want, the poor blacks and poor whites fighting amongst one another over scraps.

                  And you help propagate this to the fullest.

                  Because you refuse to put ahead of race, the fact that this is a class problem.  You fall right in line with the hate whitey movement... and that is just as bad as a white person who falls in line with the hate blacks groups.



                  Good luck with that delusional revisionist history crud, I'm not buying it because I know too well the real history.

                  Like when I bring up to you the fact that Indentured Servants way outnumbered African slaves by the hundreds of thousands for a over a CENTURY... the 1600s and 1700s.

                  It wasn't until the early 1700s when Indentured Servitude started to become unattractive and less economically feasible that Slavery came to the forefront.... in the South (of the NY New England area).

                  White Slavery in Early America
                  David Brion Davis writing in the New York Review of Books, Oct. 11, 1990, p. 37 states:
                  “As late as the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, continuing shipments of white slaves, some of them Christians, flowed from the booming slave markets on the northern Black Sea coast into Italy,Spain, Egypt and the Mediterranean islands... From Barbados to Virginia, colonists.., showed few scruples about reducing their less fortunate countrymen to a status little different from that of chattel slaves... The prevalence and suffering of white slaves, serfs and indentured servants in the early modern period suggests that there was nothing inevitable about limiting plantation slavery to people of African origin.”

                  L. Ruchames in “The Sources of Racial Thought in Colonial America,” states that “the slave trade worked in both directions, with white merchandise as well as black.” (Journal of Negro History, no. 52, pp. 251-273).

                  In 1659 the English parliament debated the practice of selling British Whites into slavery in the New World. In the debate the Whites were referred to not as “indentured servants” but as “slaves” whose “enslavement” threatened the liberties of all Englishmen. (Thomas Burton, Parliamentary Diary: 1656- 59, vol. 4, pp. 253-274).

                  Foster R. Dulles in Labor in America quotes an early document describing White children in colonial servitude as “crying and mourning for redemption from their slavery.”

                  Dr. Hilary McD. Beckles of the University of Hull, England, writes regarding White slave labor, “...indenture contracts were alienable... the ownership of which could easily be transferred, like that of any other commodity... as with slaves, ownership changed without their participation in the dialogue concerning transfer.” Beckles refers to “indentured servitude” as “White proto-slavery” (The Americas, vol. 41, no. 2, p. 21).



                  But I am appreciative of these discussions we have Credence, I would have never taken the time to listen to Bob Woodson today if not for you, I would have never learned about the extent of Indentured Servitude and how our formative first 100 years were if not for you.



                  I'll tell you why I used the ten million mark.  Because you can be worth 1 or 2 million today and be broke tomorrow.  2 million is working class, one thing goes wrong... get cancer, get crippled in a car accident, and you are back to broke before you know it.

                  The real safety net to be able to survive a disaster, be it economic or health related, is in the several million dollar range... 10 million being a good bar to stick with, though I am sure 8 million would work.

                  It isn't easy, it gets tougher everyday to make it... it is a lot harder today than I remember it being in the 80s.  Wages were higher and it was a lot easier to find a good job back then, with good benefits... it has only gotten worse in the decades since.

                  That has nothing to do with race, and has everything to do with corporatism controlling Congress, globalization, the abandonment of the working class by the Democratic Party, and so much more.

                  1. Credence2 profile image81
                    Credence2posted 13 months agoin reply to this

                    Of course no one today is responsible for,slavery, I just don't want the history clouded with lies and Right wing revisionist propaganda that says that "white people were slaves as well". People who try to convince me that indentured servitude was comparable to race based slavery and bondage in this country are disengenous. I hold a degree in History and did not just fall from a turnip truck.


                    Why do you think that I would accept being discrimated against, what good is economic achievement without the the right to vote or basic civil rights guaranteed? Yes, the Civil Rights movement was necessary. Having lived during the 1950s and 1960's we knew then that whatever prosperity you attained to could be easily taken without guarantees of Civil Rights. So, who is fooling who?

                    You are right about the indentured servants during the American colonial period, so what about the remainder of the 18th and half of the 19th centuries.

                    It's standard History, Ken, unless you have a dispute with the vast number of mainstream historians that corroborate my view of the period. You are desperately searching for excuses and there are none.

                    You refuse to acknowledge that race played a substantial role in the social/economic class struggle.

                    Hating "whitey" is not what this is all about, but being honest about how and why society is at the state it current is, is the issue.

                    I have political preferences that are not about hating "whitey" but building a fairer and more equitable society, the Rightwinger and "their excuses" and obstacles (why I see Warren as a viable candidate and not Donald Trump) consistently stand in the way.

                    Ken, if you are not out buying leer jets, I find it hard to believe that anyone with income or even net worth in the 7 figures can be considered a part of a working class or even middle class. Excuse me, As I may have to research this on my own.  I have reviewed sociology articles that clearly delineate a definition for middle class, working class, etc. the 10 million dollar man can lose of his marbles overnight as well. So, those with a net worth of 10M can be just as vulnerable.

                    I am so certain that the needs of the working class have been embraced by the GOP? If you believe that, I sell you beachfront property in Colorado.

                    It has been an education for both of us and you can recognize the intractable positions that we hold in regards to this topic. If you are not black and get your information from a small sliver of rightwing oriented Blacks that speak in your language, rather then listen to the vast majority that say otherwise, how are you qualified to judge?

            2. Sharlee01 profile image84
              Sharlee01posted 13 months agoin reply to this

              As one human being, I have the opportunity to treat others as I would hope to be treated. I also realize there is and has been a problem with racism.

              To address your sentiment in regard to admitting slavery occurred. It's part of our history, as was Would War II.   Hitler killed six million Jewish people.  This was certainly on par with the sin of slavery. Do you see the Jewish people blaming anyone? They have lived with such sorrow. They moved on to make productive lives and made sure that the holocaust was not forgotten. But also made sure the Holocaust did not detur them from striving to live side by side in peace with others. They certainly did not play the blame game. 

              Did you ever ask yourself why there is discrimination? Why some white people have feelings and views that promote discrimination?  I am sure you realize this is a two-way problem., and that problem is not the color of one's skin.

              "f time. So, while you cannot be held personally responsible, I resent the idea that this reality is treated as non existent"

              I can only speak for myself. I do not feel in any respect responsible for slavery, and I am pleased you understand that. I did not mean to imply the problem of racism does not exist. It certainly does exist. I had hoped to imply that discrimination does not affect me.   I look at people as human beings, skin color does not come into consideration in my interactions with others.

              1. Credence2 profile image81
                Credence2posted 13 months agoin reply to this

                "As one human being, I have the opportunity to treat others as I would hope to be treated. I also realize there is and has been a problem with racism."

                Well, Sharlee, if we can at least acknowledge that, there is a chance.

                We have to include with slavery, government sanctioned, terror, discrimination and official bias for at least 100 years after the eradication of slavery.

                The Third Reich lasted 12 years and I cannot minimize the crimes of the Nazis, but 12 years does cover generation after generation. Our own all American holocaust toward blacks extends over Centuries. In other words, 12 years is not 350. Our Government did not see fit to get involved in prohibiting lynching and hold those that connected them accountable, thought the latter 19th century up through almost the first half of the twentieth. This is just an example.

                It is human nature to favor those of ones own tribe, I understand that but civility demands of us that if we are to peacefully coexist, provincial attitudes and values must be put aside.  To have a legal system, criminal justice system that we all support and pay taxes to maintain playing favorites is beyond the pale. That power and influence is not wielded by blacks over whites, is it?

                The problem is that the country still have too many "Central Park Karen's" that proclaim that they do not have a racist bone in their body. We hear that all of the time, but the proof is in the pudding and actions speaks louder than words. If you are operating under those condition, you become part of the solution and not the problem.

                1. Sharlee01 profile image84
                  Sharlee01posted 13 months agoin reply to this

                  Well, I guess I could be considered a person that proclaimed I am not racist. I also brought up my children to have the same values in regard to color of skin. You say you hear that all the time. Curious you seem to be unable to believe it.

                  Perhaps you are bound to that belief, and this may be part of the problem. It's not me that see's you differently, it is you. Thay to me would be cancer that could envelop your very being. In using the Holocaust in contrast to slavery. I was trying to point out how their "tribe" rallied, nothing held them back to move on from their torture, their loss. They asked for nothing, they through their own strength built their tribe to be respected, to be excepted. They did not choose to blame or ask anyone to step in to fix their torn lives. They worked, they repaired.   

                  The proof is in the pudding. This is a very true sentiment. So, the Democrats have for so many years have at every election made their apologies, then their same old promises...  I ask is this not true? Have they brought your tribe forward or have they due to wanting power used the black community to keep the cancer of racism alive? To create a deeper divide. You speak of those on the right. I will be very honest, and this is not meant to be insulting to you or your race.

                  Many of us on the right see the picture very clearly and have stopped caring due to it well appears a lost cause. Black people are destined to follow Dems, that is their given right. many of us just don't care and are willing to step away from the problem. Not make it worse, but just stay out of it. It appears black people just have little trust in regard to those on the right.

                  You wonder why so much more needs to be done, worked on... You have used the words generation after generation.  It's time to stop and check the pudding. It would appear it has just never cooked properly.

                  And now once again many apologies, many promises. And you wonder why some lose the want to help. It well appears you are very satisfied and even hiped at this point with what the Dems are apologizing for, and all the new promises.

                  Do yourself a service and look at the factual good Trump has done for the black people of this country. Actions do speak louder than words. But, one must be able to hear clearly, and not with bias.

                2. IslandBites profile image91
                  IslandBitesposted 13 months agoin reply to this

                  The problem is that the country still have too many "Central Park Karen's" that proclaim that they do not have a racist bone in their body.

                  They can't hear themselves.
                  "Blacks are the problem." "Blacks are lazy." "They don't work, all they do is whine" "Why can't they move on?!" "They want everything free" So on and on. But "hey! Im no racist! I see no color."

                  Disgusting.

                  1. Credence2 profile image81
                    Credence2posted 13 months agoin reply to this

                    Can't leave the guys out, IB

                    "Central Park Kens"

                    That thread you started about the North Carolina police officers overheard making the most vile racist comments seemed pretty stupid on their part, really. And I am supposed to believe that these men are not taking their stated attitudes and opinions and not applying them to the way that they do their jobs?

                    But, of course, when confronted, they would tell you that "I am not racist".

                    And yes, it is disgusting....

  2. Nathanville profile image94
    Nathanvilleposted 13 months ago

    I too am on the left of politics, and the vast majority of the time I am usually in opposition to the political policies of our Right-wing Conservative Party in the UK; albeit being a Socialist, my politics is a lot further left than that of the American Democrats.

    That being said, I am currently rather of an open mind on the issue of bringing down statues:  Largely I think because I am a Bristolian (born and bred), because although these days Bristolians are by nature very Liberal/Socialist, Bristol was built on the wealth of the Slave Trade; and so it’s an integral part of our ‘history’.  Outside of London, Bristol was the biggest port in England during the slave trade and hence was the main port in the slave trade with the Americas.  During the 110 year period of the slave trade in Britain, until 1807 when the British Government made ‘slavery’ illegal, Bristol transported over half a million slaves to north America.

    The Whole concept of pulling down these statues started in my own city of Bristol on the 7th June, when Bristolians pulled down the statue of Edward Colston and dumped it in the docks.  The craze quickly spread to the rest of the UK over the next 24 hours, and then became a craze in the USA within 48 hours.  So if you want to blame anyone, blame my fellow Bristolian citizens:-

    Who was slave trader Edward Colston and why was his statue pulled down?  https://youtu.be/l70SI9I1UPk

    Edward Colston wasn’t the only Bristol slave trader by any means, but he is by far the most famous one in that he used his (blood money) wealth to build schools, churches, hospitals and alms-houses (food and shelter for the poor) across Bristol; to the extent that there are now over 20 places across Bristol named in his honour, including ‘Colston Window', which is the biggest stained glass window in Bristol Cathedral, and which contains a series of coloured pictures of Edward Colston (storyboard).

    After Bristolians pulled down the statue of Edward Colston, a comprehensive survey was conducted of what Bristolians think (public opinion), with the following results:-

    •    53% of Bristolians think that everything named after Colston and other slave traders in Bristol should be renamed.

    •    18% of Bristolians think that some of the places bearing his name, but not all, should be renamed.

    •    29% of Bristolians think that nothing should be renamed.

    •    61% of Bristolians said the protesters were right to pull down the statue.

    •    56% of Bristolians feel that throwing the statue in the water was the right thing to do.

    •    60% of Bristolians feel that it was not right that Bristol had the statue in the first place, because of Colston's links to the slave trade.

    •    27% of Bristolians feel the statue had its place, as it was possible to acknowledge his contribution to the city while condemning his links to the slave trade.

    •    12% of Bristolians feel that Colston was an important part of the city's history and that he deserved a statue.

    •    3% of Bristolians feel that Colston was not important enough to have a statue.

    •    57% of Bristolians feel that they did not think those responsible for toppling the statue should face criminal charges.

    The statue has since been retrieved from the docks and will be placed in a Bristol Museum, where the full story of Edward Colston can be told.

    To put the above survey into context of Politics; Bristolians have always been very left-wing politically, to the extent that ALL four political constituencies are Labour Strong Holds in Parliament, and we currently have an elected Labour Mayor.  And in Local Government in Bristol, of the 70 Bristol Local Government seats, the current political makeup is:-

    Labour (Left wing Socialists) = 36 seats.
    Green Party (Left wing Socialists) = 11 seats.
    Liberal Democrats (Centralists Liberalism) = 9 seats.
    Conservatives (right wing) = 14 seats.

    1. Credence2 profile image81
      Credence2posted 13 months agoin reply to this

      Arthur,

      If I had to ask a question, I would wonder from your perspective what is the difference between the labor and Green Party?

      I see that my left of center politics relative to the U.s. is sort of middle of the road in the U.K.

      I would not bring down statues just for its own sake. Mr. Colston would be a toss up for me. I remind of myself of Andrew Carnegie, a great American philanthropist but a ruthless union busting corporate capitalist. His legacy of libraries bearing his name has remained. Ruthless, corporate capitalists are heroes here.

      I have tried to not let the fact that men do not deserve recogare nition completely because they owned slaves. I might have trouble with Colston as he was behind much of the slave trade itself. Maybe, his statue should come down?

      I can overlook Jefferson, Washington and Francis Scott Key, but not Jeff
      Davis, Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson, etc. Here we speak of treason and insurrection, not just slave holders and advocates of same. The rightwingers here like to disguise their affection for these men as "heritage". But that is THEIR heritage not mine. I am reminded of the Civil War and the temerity of people who thought that they could possess men as property. I can accept them in a museum setting only, not the recipient of my tax dollars for their maintenance. My job is simply to shove the Rightwingers' nose in to their own droppings and challenge them to convince me that there is this aroma of ambrosia.

      1. wilderness profile image96
        wildernessposted 13 months agoin reply to this

        "But that is THEIR heritage not mine."

        As an American, of course it's your heritage just as it is mine.  Good, bad or indifferent, it is your heritage - it's the history of the country.

        But have you considered that the North, with it's greater population, simply decided to change the entire lifestyle and livelihood of Southerners?  Without regard to those people at all?  You and I will agree that their actions were a very good cause (none better, anywhere or any time), but we both know that Southerners in general would not have.  Does that make them automatically bad people because they objected to such an action? 

        Suppose the greenies of today were able to unilaterally declare that tomorrow (not 5 years from now, but tomorrow) would see an end to all fossil fuel use.  An obviously good thing to do, but millions will go cold come winter, thousands in the south will die from heat and tens of thousands will starve without truck shipments of food. 

        You fight that obviously good cause - a cause and action that comes down from our government.  Will that make you a bad person?

        1. Credence2 profile image81
          Credence2posted 13 months agoin reply to this

          The problem, Wilderness,, is that we have starkly different perceptions of what this country is and where it is going.

          I do not excuse the North, Wilderness, They all profited from the uncompensated labor of millions of people. It started from the cotton fields and continued to the North's textile industries with finished products sent to Europe. So,all were complicit with the only real victims being the black slaves. 

          Slavery was more than. "Lifestyle". From the 1820's till the Civil War, fugitive slave acts, Mousouri Compromises, etc, painted the land scape. Lincoln said that the nation could not endure as a nation indefinitely half slave and half free. I don't care about those  people, how can you expect me to have any affinity for people that hold others in bondage solely for,
          the color of his skin as part of a "lifestyle"? But, it is always so much easy to excuse when it is not you or your forebears, really now?

          Denying a human being their right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is far more involved than any issue about fossil fuels. It strikes at the very meaning of being an American and a human being. I am surprised that you could consider your example as comparable. One situation is hypothetical and quite unlikely to actually occur while the other did in fact take place.

          There was a conflict with the American creed and the actual practice, how long did you think that contradiction could remain within a unified country?

          1. wilderness profile image96
            wildernessposted 13 months agoin reply to this

            That's just what I said: slavery was intolerable and had to go.

            But you're completely ignoring what Southerners thought of that idea, just setting it aside as if those feelings were never there and then demonizing them for wanting to run their own lives as they saw fit.  They were not demons; they were people of the times, times in which slavery was an acceptable practice, and they fought to maintain that.  Wrong, yes (by our standards) but that did not make them evil.

            1. Credence2 profile image81
              Credence2posted 13 months agoin reply to this

              OK, I see your point. That is why I believe the statues to Jefferson and Washington should stand. America is not about "running your lives as you see fit" and still claiming to be American and what it is that is supposed to mean. How can your right to sovereignty and independence incorporate my subjugation?

              A system of economic exploitation that Lincoln one said was the age old retort, where I toil to create the bread that others eat.

              The bigotry moves into America folklore, the Lost Cause and the Happy Slave, etc. all part of a sinister perpetuation of an idea that goes far beyond slavery's eradication. A national crime and miscarriage of justice is justified, excused and mitigated under the cover of "States Rights". The same rights claimed by the Confederacy, were rehashed 100 years later by the Republicans and Barry Goldwater.

              While I cannot demonize them, (heroes of the Confederacy) they certainly are not be to be considered heroes. The museum is where their likenesses belong.

              1. wilderness profile image96
                wildernessposted 13 months agoin reply to this

                "America is not about "running your lives as you see fit" and still claiming to be American and what it is that is supposed to mean."

                Isn't that the definition of "freedom"?  We all recognize that we must give up some freedom to live in a society, but the northerners had decided to unilaterally change the society of the south whether they lived there or not.  It is impossible to condone slavery (I like to think I would not have tolerated it had I lived then, either) but I DO recognize that the people then did not see things as I do.  They were wrong, IMO - VERY wrong - but that does not blind me to the fact that their actions were quite acceptable and reasonable...to them.  And that they very highly disliked the notion that those northerners could, and would, decide FOR the south how they should live.  I would have fought for the North, but also would have understood the feelings of the South.

                You talk about "states rights", but at the same time set them aside in favor of the national government that, even then, was growing in power and overriding the rights of those states.  Worse, you then demonize the people that lived in those states without ever even trying to empathize or understand their stance.  A mistake, IMO, and one that is continuing today, for those statues and even the confederate flag do not stand for slavery - they stand for the SOUTH, and make no mistake - southerners (particularly of the redneck persuasion) take as great a pride in being southern as you do in being black.  You choose (choose!) to assign their totems as worshiping slavery, but they don't, so when you tear them down it means something totally different to them.

            2. Tim Truzy info4u profile image97
              Tim Truzy info4uposted 13 months agoin reply to this

              To support an abomination which honors bondage of others while ripping your country apart to maintain such an institution ranks up their with evil. By the way, as soon as Lee chose to not lead the U.S. troops as directed by Lincoln, it's tough to consider him an American - he was a Confederate, a traitor, a turncoat, an evil man who wanted to support an evil institution. Call evil what it is.
              More importantly, the South wanted to continue producing textile goods, encouraging Great Britain to join them against the U.S. - never mind G.B. had abolished slavery nearly 50 years earlier than our Civil War - but the South would take up arms against people in the U.S. Not very nice, South.

      2. Nathanville profile image94
        Nathanvilleposted 13 months agoin reply to this

        A fair question Credence: 

        The simple answer is Labour recognises the importance of a good economic policy to further their goals; the Green Party doesn’t.

        In more detail:  The Labour Party was founded by the Trade Unions in 1900, and to this day is largely controlled by the Unions:-

        •    Labour Party Policy is decided annually, at their Annual Conference, with the Labour Party Membership (The General Public who pay their subscriptions to join the Labour Party) holding 50% of the votes, and Trade Unions having the other 50% of the votes.

        •    The Labour Party Leader (who becomes Prime Minister when Labour is in power) is elected with the Membership holding 33% of the votes, elected Labour MPs holding 33% of the votes, and the Trade Unions holding 33% of the votes.

        •    Likewise, candidates to stand for Labour in elections are selected with input from the Labour Party, its Members, and the Trade Unions.

        In contract the Green Party, is a party of ideology e.g. the environment, anti-nuclear etc.  So their policies tend to be more extreme than Labours, and has no regard for economic e.g. if the Green Party had absolute power they would abolish the use of all fossil fuels overnight and decommission Britain’s nuclear defence.

        In practice, in Local Governments like Bristol where Labour may not always have overall control in Local Elections, Labour will often form a coalition with the Green Party; and it makes a good partnership because Labour can impose a good economic policy, while at the same time also pursuing ‘green issues’, which both parties have in common.

        In 2015, it was Labour's coalition with the Green Party in Bristol, in conjunction with an 'Independent' elected Mayor at the time (the man in red trousers in the video below), who was also very 'green' orientated, that made it possible for Bristol to win the 'Green Capital of Europe' Award.

        Bristol Green Capital 2015: https://youtu.be/YK3XrVAhxqA

        In practice, in our ‘central Government’ (Parliament), the Green Party has one safe seat (Brighton); and although it’s only one seat out of 650 seats, it’s a seat of influence because in ‘Parliamentary Select Committees’ (cross-party Committees, independent of Government) the Green Party MP is always included as a Member on those ‘Select Committees’ that cover ‘Environmental’ Issues. 

        Select Committees are important, because they can bring Governments to account in Parliament, and therefore, they do have some influence over Governments, and Government Policy.

        •    Election Results of Green Party MP in Brighton Constituency:  https://youtu.be/B-iiOsz7hwc?t=40

        •    How do House of Commons Select Committees work?  https://youtu.be/o_2RDuDs44c

        STATUES
        Personally, having a statue of Colston in Bristol didn’t bother me because he is part of our Bristol history; and his statue was there to honour the good that he did for Bristol.  Albeit I was aware of his dark side as a ‘slave trader’, so having it removed to a museum, where the full story can be told also seems reasonable to me.

        Likewise, I don’t have any issues with Winston Churchill’s statue in London, because if it wasn’t for Churchill, Britain would have lost the war and we would now be under Germany Rule.  However, my mother (of his generation) found his statue distasteful for political reasons; just as I would find a statue of Margaret Thatcher distasteful for political reasons. 

        In fact, since Bristolians pulled down the Colston Statue in Bristol, Winston Churchill’s Statue in London has become a controversial focal point between left and right-wing activist groups.  Initially sparked by left-wing groups defacing the statue; then followed by some extremist far right-wing activist groups’ intent on violent confrontation with peaceful left-wing protesters in London.

        Protests over Winston Churchill’s statue: https://youtu.be/Gus897TIH4c

        So when it comes to the issue of ‘statues’ in the UK, the famous quote “one man's meat is another man's poison” does seem to be very relevant at the moment.  Therefore, I have come to the view that whether a statue should remain, or be removed, should be left to ‘public opinion’ (the will of the people); and in the case of Colston, the ‘will’ of the people’ in Bristol is that it should be removed, and placed in a museum where the ‘full’ story can be told (which is what will now happen).  In other cities around the UK the Authorities are generally listening to the ‘will of the people’ (public opinion) and taking action accordingly.

        However, the one thing I would object to would be ‘re-writing history’ (or hiding history) by removing a statue (considered contentious by some) and then not placing it in a museum where the full story can be told.

        1. Credence2 profile image81
          Credence2posted 13 months agoin reply to this

          Well, Arthur, sounds like the "Green Party" is a fringe movement and has a nasty streak of anarchy in its makeup.

          Churchill who was probably associated with the concepts of colonialism in a negative way, still has earned his position in Britain as a hero. I have had the honor of meeting many of the survivors of the London Blitz over many beers across many of the London pubs while there in the 1970's. And like you said, Churchill, his determination and persona  kept Britain out from Hitler's clutches. And, like Washington and Jefferson here, I could give him a pass after one looks at the big picture.

          In this controversy, I don't want to appear unreasonable. But, if I were a British subject, I would have a hard time attempting to denigrating Winston Churchill.

          1. Nathanville profile image94
            Nathanvilleposted 13 months agoin reply to this

            I can understand your impression of the ‘Green Party’ (as an American), based on my comments.  However, in the UK and across Europe they are not a ‘fringe movement’, and although their ideology may point towards ‘anarchy’, it’s not so much a ‘nasty streak of anarchy’ e.g. they don’t advocate anarchism, but rather more of a case of prioritising ‘green’ issues to the exclusion of the economic consequences if transition to a ‘green’ society was to be rushed through too quickly. 

            In other words they are too single minded (focused) on just the one issue (Green):  A cause which most Europeans support in principle; so the Green Party does have a lot of sympathy, and moral support, from Europeans citizens (including British citizens).

            British Politics (like all European Countries, is multi-political).  The Green Party is the 5th largest Political Party in the UK, so their voice is heard loud and clear in Politics and does have a major impact on British Politics.

            Below is the current total number of ‘Local Government’ seats across the whole of the UK, by Political Party, which gives some idea of the political makeup of the British people:-

            •    Conservative (right wing capitalists) = 7,445 seats   
            •    Labour (left wing socialists) = 6,291 seats   
            •    Liberal Democrats (centralists, Liberalism) = 2,527 seats   
            •    SNP (Scottish National Party) (left wing socialists) = 421 seats (the largest political party in Scotland, and the third largest political party in the UK Parliament with 48 seats out of 650).
            •    Green (hard left wing politics) = 387 seats   
            •    Plaid Cymru (Welsh National Party) (left wing socialists) = 199 seats
            •    DUP (Northern Ireland) (Extreme right wing) = 122 seats                   
            •    Sinn Féin (Northern Ireland) (Extreme left wing) = 105 seats               
            •    UUP (Northern Ireland) (right wing) = 75     seats                       
            •    UKIP (UK Independent Party) (extreme right wing) = 61 seats               
            •    SDLP (Northern Ireland) (left wing Socialists) = 59 seats                   
            •    Alliance (centralists, Liberalism) = 53 seats                       
            •    Brexit Party (extreme right wing) = 32 seats
            •    Independent Councillors (various political makeup from left to right) = 2,371 seats   

            In the EU Parliament the Greens have 67 seats out of 704 seats (currently the fourth largest Political Party in the EU), and therefore they wield a significant influence on EU Policy making e.g. the main driving force behind the EU’s steady progression towards moving away from fossil fuel and replacing it with Renewable Energy.

            In the UK the Green Party (although only 1 MP in Parliament, because they get disfranchised by the 1st past the post system) did nevertheless have a major influence on Theresa May (previous Conservative Prime Minister), in that:-

            •    Originally Theresa May had set the date for when fossil fuel cars will be banned in the UK as 2040, but due to pressure from the Green Party, before she resigned as Prime Minister, Theresa May changed to law to bring that date forward to 2035.

            •    Also, although Theresa May boycotted the meeting last year in Parliament between all the main political leaders (in including the Green Party) and Greta Thunberg; shortly after that meeting Theresa May surprised everyone by pushing through a law through Parliament that makes it a ‘Legal’ Requirement that Britain will be ‘carbon neutral’ by 2050 e.g. the only country in the world where it’s a legal requirement rather than just government policy.

            Greta Thunberg meets all the Political Leaders (except for Theresa May), from all the main political parties in UK Parliament (the first person shown on the video is the Green Party Leader):  https://youtu.be/1iAL2zk3DUE

            UK 'first major economy' to commit (by law) to zero emissions by 2050 (Conservative Policy influenced by the Green Party): https://youtu.be/hj7v8e1uLyE

            CHURCHILL
            I agree with you, as a British subject, personally I don denigrate Winston Churchill; and I don’t think the majority of Brits denigrate him either e.g. opinion poll in 2019 on Winston Churchill:-

            •    72% of Brits view Churchill positively.
            •    16% of Brits have a neutral view, and
            •    7% of Brits have a negative view of Churchill.

          2. Nathanville profile image94
            Nathanvilleposted 13 months agoin reply to this

            On reflection, my portrayal of the ‘Green Party’ might have been a bit harsh, in that they are in the same position now that the Labour Party was before the 2nd world war e.g. an ideological party with (apart from power sharing in coalitions) no real experience of trying to run an economy on their own.

            Prior to the 2nd world war Labour was a minority party with the Liberals and Conservatives being the two main parties.  Then in 1945, just after the war, when everyone expected Winston Churchill to win, because he was the national hero for winning the war, Labour (to everyone’s surprise) won a landslide victory in the 1945 General Election; winning two thirds of the seats in the House of Commons.

            So an inexperienced ideological party (the political wing of the Trade Unions) suddenly found themselves with absolute power at a time when Britain was on the verge of bankruptcy (because of the war).  In spite of that the newly elected Socialist Government still managed to push through all its radical reforms e.g. the creation of the NHS (free universal healthcare for all at the point of use), massive Social Welfare Reforms, and much more (all of which we all still enjoy to this day); and they still managed to keep the economy afloat, with heavy borrowing from the USA which was only finally paid back just two years ago.

            So Labour was thrown in at the deep end, and survived.  So I do wonder, if push comes to shove, how pragmatic (and realistic) the Green Party would actually be?

            The UK’s Green Party Election Manifesto is:-

            •    Unleash a Green Economic and Social Revolution.
            •    Re-join the EU.
            •    Unleash a Democratic Revolution.
            •    Unleash a Revolution in Public Services.
            •    Unleash a Revolution in the Redistribution of Wealth.

    2. Readmikenow profile image98
      Readmikenowposted 13 months agoin reply to this

      Nathan,

      Thanks for that insight as to what is happening in Bristol.  Is this something that is an issue in other parts of the UK?

      1. Nathanville profile image94
        Nathanvilleposted 13 months agoin reply to this

        Yes, the actions in Bristol sparked a response across the whole of Britain.

        Within 24 hours of the statue being toppled in Bristol, long lists across the UK emerged of statues associated with racism that large numbers of the British people want removed, and building names and road names that large numbers of the British people want changed because of their association with racism:-

        However, the situation was largely defused across the country; because local Labour Governments (and Labour Mayors) were quick to respond positively e.g. listening to the campaigners and in consultation with them, reviewing the situation and taking action; some Local Governments were quick to take down several statutes and remove them to museums (where they properly belong).

        Even Boris Johnson (Prime Minister) listened to the ‘will’ of the people; and generally sided with the protestors, and was supportive of Labour Governments in working with the people to make changes as necessary to the satisfaction of everyone, for the more obvious ‘contentious’ statues.  Albeit he (and probably quite rightly) felt that targeting the Winston Churchill statue in London is a step too far!

        But it’s not a simple question of erasing ‘all history’ that is tainted with ‘human blood’ of ‘inhumanity’; because amongst the protestors against statues glorifying people with a tainted pass, are a large number of ‘black people’ who don’t want the ‘history’ erased because it erases the suffering of ‘black slaves’; they want any statue that remains (or removed to museums) to properly reflect the suffering e.g. with plaques explaining their role in the slave trade, rather than just glorifying those people for the good they may have done.

        The Statue of Robert Peel will be a little tricky to resolve as although there are campaigners who want it removed; there are also counter-campaigners who want to protect that statue:  So that the Local Government in the Midlands are going to need the wisdom of Solomon to pacify the situation?

        So there are lots of discussion between Local Governments, and Campaigners, as to what to do with these statues etc. e.g. whether they should have a plaque underneath explaining their ‘inhumanity’ so that the suffering of the ‘black slaves’ is not forgotten, or whether they should be removed to museums, where the story (history) can be properly told.

  3. Tim Truzy info4u profile image97
    Tim Truzy info4uposted 13 months ago

    Yes, assuming China and India don't have a nuclear war. Or China and Russia. Western standards matter because it is the West China seeks to imitate. Why else would China seek approval from western academic sciences in doing research - because they have even stated they want to imitate the west. However, you are looking at theft in a way which ignores theft.

  4. GA Anderson profile image91
    GA Andersonposted 13 months ago

    Damn just when you most need a fence post, nary one in sight.

    I think Ken makes some valid points relative to the issue being a class struggle, (poverty vs. non-poverty), but I think you make a good one too:

    ". . . so what about the remainder of the 18th and half of the 19th centuries."      '
    . . .
    "You refuse to acknowledge that race played a substantial role in the social/economic class struggle."
    [

    Relative to the discussion of innate racism, I also think it is the post-abolition period that is pertinent.

    So it appears, to me, that this discussion is talking about the same thing—in the end, but from such distant perspectives that you have ended up talking about different things; the inequities of racism vs. the more foundational perspective of class struggle.

    In the sphere of race relations, I'm with you Cred. I think there is an innate and unintentional white prejudice, but relative to the social and economic aspects of the conversation, I am beginning to see some truths in what Ken is saying.

    If the conversation advanced beyond the individual arenas of the "symptoms;" 'racism' and 'inequality,' into the bigger picture of Ken's points—capital control vs. economic status, then I think there is a lot to consider concerning who the 'rulers' are and what the 'real' issue is.

    Everyone loves a good conspiracy bud, but think about it, could the real motivator be a purposeful pitting of the have-somes against the have-nots, (a very real issue), or the lingering residue of racism that is only a shadow of what it once was?

    Or, (for bonus points), am I the naive one for even thinking that our racism problems is a residual one?

    GA

    1. Credence2 profile image81
      Credence2posted 13 months agoin reply to this

      Well, GA, it can be said that there is merit in Ken's comments. My only point is that it is not either or, but both race and social/economics. The "rulers" pit people against each other to distract attention from them and what they do.

      Racism, I believed was just another one of those tools as people see loyalty to their tribe and to a racial hierarchy as superseding what should be commonly held economic interests and concerns.

      In the Ante-bellum era, this was done by the Southern planters, keeping poor whites in line by giving them a psychological wage of superiority to the black slave. And in America long after slavery ended, it has proven a very effective cudgel for keeping the masses in line and fighting against one another.

      And, I confess that this is at least part of Trump's appeal, the US against Them scenario. But for Trump and the corporatists, in reality, there is only one side, their own.

      I believed in this exploitation model until I found examples of racism through and through even when there is no economic, political threat or motivation. .

      I think that racism is more than residual, although less blantant than it once was, much of it may have been simply morphed into different forms ( Central Park Karen) was an eye opener on the ease people can fall back into the old patterns, that have now been made chic and trendy, " I am not racist".

      1. Sharlee01 profile image84
        Sharlee01posted 13 months agoin reply to this

        'I think that racism is more than residual, although less blatant than it once was, much of it may have been simply morphed into different forms ( Central Park Karen) was an eye-opener on the ease people can fall back into the old patterns, that have now been made chic and trendy, " I am not racist".

        I have been following this thread, this back and forth conversation, this paragraph caught my interest.  I pondered how to express my opinion on Central Park Karen, and do some just fall back on stating  I am not a racist line more often over the past many years. Why this statement more prevalent at this time in our history.

        Here is where my opinion gets dicey. and it is not meant to be anything but my truth --- With the protests occurring naturally the conversation of racism is being raised frequently in social settings. I have witnessed the subject being brought to an abrupt end when someone said "I am not a racist".   It appears many are willing to just close the subject due to a form of fatigue. Are many becoming jaded to the problem just due to the lack of progress being made after so many years? In fact, in my view, the life quality for black people in America appears to be worsening. 

        Over my years on this earth I have evolved, in my young adult years, I was a pure liberal. Over the years I backed away from the Democratic party due to a form of liberalism I did not recognize or could I respect the new definition of liberalism. Over the past few years in my view, the new liberal ideology is blatantly harming racial progress.  It would appear black people are being emboldened to believe tearing down America would need to be accomplished before they will receive the change they desire. This kind of destabilization only works to deepen the divide between white and black citizens.  The recent developments due to the protest only work to solidify many's opinions that  Black people are violent, many care little about killing their own. Because in the end, nothing has been accomplished due to these protests. Yes, they took six blocks and made it an autonomous zone, police free. And four of its residents were shot, one man killed by another black man, and a deaf woman raped... Many other protesters were hurt, 13 innocent black people were killed due to looting and riots.

        It would seem your comment implies you feel these protests have been beneficial to your cause.  I am not sure why you feel this kind of carnage would help in any respect. 

        Realistically all these protesters have done is bring a spotlight on violence, black killing black, looting bringing down status, and defacing a church. It would appear BLM is condoning violence, tearing down not building up.  Actually making many white people cringe with disgust, and moreover these protests may have worked to solidify many long time racist beliefs.   

        In one of my previous comments, I made the claim that I am not a racist. I have come closer to believing that. But I have had an epiphany.  I actually on the fence in regard to the problems of racism, I do not consider myself to be racist. However, I have come to the conclusion I really don't care about the problem at this point in my life.  I think there is little that can be done to improve racism in this kind of atmosphere, a lost battle, or a waste of energy. At this point, the problem is being exacerbated due to violence and acts that only serve to make all worse.  Hopefully, the black community will realize they are being led down a path that is defeating their purpose.

        I am willing to live and let live., and continue to respect a person, not for their color but their deeds.  If this makes me a racist, so be it.

        1. Credence2 profile image81
          Credence2posted 13 months agoin reply to this

          "I have been following this thread, this back and forth conversation, this paragraph caught my interest.  I pondered how to express my opinion on Central Park Karen, and do some just fall back on stating  I am not a racist line more often over the past many years. Why this statement more prevalent at this time in our history."

          It does not have to be a "line", it can be the truth if more people would just  "walk the talk"

          The killing of Floyd was the catalyst and opened the eyes of many, black and white to a glaring problem within the system that Blacks have screaming about for years but until Floyd, fell of deaf ears. Now, with one video the world gets to see the worse of America's dirty laundry. People who have been remote to all of this now have to ask themselves questions.

          I sort of expected the "fatigue" that you speak of. There has been progress and to say "I am not a racist" is a form of cop-out, answering a question with a non-answer. Who knows, it may be part of your DNA? I really don't have much trouble here in the South, but my psychological defense mechanisms are so finely honed based on years of experience. I would not recognize "a slight", if it were in my face, my "shields are up". I am more than content to do my bit with the sharp point of my pen. It may be the same with white folks when the subject of racism comes up.

          There are certain biases in your statements here. Would we just continue to sit  and be quiet with an unjust status quo over rather than continue to agitate for the reforms we believe necessary? We have reasoned through these things on our own and are not being "emboldened" by an outside entity.

          Except for the very wealthy, the situation has declined for most everybody. The difference is that when it comes to adverse events, the meltdown in 2008 and the most recent pandemic, we, Blacks are hit twice as hard. Yes, America needs reform, but the kind most of you would not give an inch toward accommodating. Every inch of progress over the last century has to have come thru riots, national guard incursions and Supreme Court mandates. The status quo is unstable by definition. "Black people violent", that is another stereotype, reducing them and their behavior to that of animals as if whites do not engage in assaults, homicides, etc. I am not defending black on black crime, but gang activity has been around long before blacks and inner cities. The fight and struggle over the same, turf, drugs, money. Not much different than Capone in Chicago 100 years ago. But I believe that the temerity of a law officer to strangle a man before millions or 2 men in GA killing a jogger on the road for no real reason strikes me as being a couple of octaves lower than any gang activity.

          The vast majority of these protests have been peaceful and regardless of Trump and the Right trying to kill the messenger, the message will and must continue. I am waiting for the Right to become unglued and perform a dastardly act against the protesters since they won't self silence.

          There were an awful lot of white folks marching in protest with BLM. Maybe some of them just might have taken the concern to heart and will act politically in response. That is not bad for a Marxist inspired organization. In spite of the fatigue we all have, the reality is that if we all cannot find comfort, none of us will find it.

  5. IslandBites profile image91
    IslandBitesposted 13 months ago

    "It amazes me how many of the people that claim that 'slavery ended 150 years ago', and that 'black folks just need to leave it in the past or just get over it,' will also fight tooth and nail to keep statues or (unofficial) flags from the same period, claiming that 'they are our heritage,' and that 'you can't ignore or forget about history,'" he said. "You can't have it both ways...that's called hypocrisy." <--------- THIS

    Mississippi pastor says he was kicked out of church for saying ‘black lives matter’

    A Columbus, Miss., pastor, who is white, was allegedly given the boot by his former church for supporting protests and the idea that "black lives matter" after George Floyd's police-related death, The Christian Post reports.

    https://www.foxnews.com/us/protest-chur … ppi-pastor

    1. Readmikenow profile image98
      Readmikenowposted 13 months agoin reply to this

      You do realize that Black Lives Matter is an organization based on communist doctrine?  This is from one of the organization's founders.

      “We are trained Marxists. We are super-versed on, sort of, ideological theories."

      "Cullors, 36, was the protégé of Eric Mann, former agitator of the Weather Underground domestic terror organization, and spent years absorbing the Marxist-Leninist ideology that shaped her worldview"

      https://nypost.com/2020/06/25/blm-co-fo … d-marxist/

      1. Sharlee01 profile image84
        Sharlee01posted 13 months agoin reply to this

        Not many really have done enough research into BLM to understand the ideology. I am pleased to see over the past week some have come out of the woodwork and have been sharing their scary ideology with media. They have become emboldened, and this us a good thing as I see it.  The more that hear the ideology the better. Very scary stuff.

      2. Credence2 profile image81
        Credence2posted 13 months agoin reply to this

        Funny, that is what J.Edgar and conservatives said of ML King and the Civil Rights Movement (Marxist/Leninist inspired). It is so interesting to note how things never really change?

        1. Readmikenow profile image98
          Readmikenowposted 13 months agoin reply to this

          J. Edgar alleged ML King and the Civil Right Movement was inspired by Marxist/Lenin philosophy.  MLK never admitted to such a thing. 

          With Black Live Matter...the leaders openly declare to the media they are a Marxist and "trained" Marxist.  They say this to anyone who will listen to them. 

          BIG difference.

          1. Credence2 profile image81
            Credence2posted 13 months agoin reply to this

            Ok, I see your point, there is more to express, but I will save it for another day.

    2. Readmikenow profile image98
      Readmikenowposted 13 months agoin reply to this

      Typical one-sided reporting by a news source.  The pastor alleges (no proof just an allegation) that he was removed for supporting Black lives Matter. 

      "A Columbus, Miss., pastor, who is white, was allegedly given the boot by his former church for supporting protests and the idea that "black lives matter" after George Floyd's police-related death, The Christian Post reports."

      I would like to point out in the entire article, nobody from the church board was interviewed.  It was a one-sided hit piece.  What a shame such a story actually is considered journalism.

      Since Murdoch started turning over control of Fox to his children, it is slowly becoming crap.

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://corp.maven.io/privacy-policy

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)