What Does Republican Cancel Culture Look Like?

1. 90

   crankaliciousposted 3 years ago

   Republican politicians in Texas forced the cancellation of a book talk that questioned the myth of the Alamo.
   
   https://www.texastribune.org/2021/07/01 … -canceled/
   
   This is Republican cancel culture - if they don't like the message and the truth of something is hard to swallow, they suppress the message and stop the conversation.
   
   Republicans don't want to talk about slavery and they're not interested in the truth or even a discussion about the truth. Conversations and presentations of the facts are what make learning possible. Republicans, especially in Texas, aren't interested in the truth or with learning at all. They don't want learning. They want indoctrination.
   
   There's nothing wrong with allowing somebody to present their position and their evidence and to have a discussion about what that evidence shows.
   
   Democrat's cancel culture is also damaging because it doesn't allow people to make mistakes and to learn from their mistakes, but in capitalism, if you make a mistake, consumers have a right not to buy your product. Republicans are cancelling basic information, cancelling history, and promoting myth over facts.

   replyreport
   1. 80

      Credence2posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Yeah, Crank, we were all raise on the "Alamo". Beautiful melodies in the film. But, it is part of the myth with John Wayne, starring ((1960).
      
      It was years until I found that all these men did not fight and die against Santa Ana to the last man. But, in fact many surrendered and were executed, a little different twist from the fable. Yes, Republicans and conservatives love indoctrination, don't speak of self discovery and independent inquiry to these guys.
      
      Show me how anything Democrats and progressives do that rise to the malevolent levels that is routine for the political right?
      
      
      
      The Right is content with fables and watering down parts of history that contradict their political and ideologically nonsensical stands. But, I won't  let them continue without a challenge.

      replyreport
2. 85

   Sharlee01posted 3 years ago

   It appears that the authors or one could call them new Texas historians,  are changing the way some contemporary Texans look at their state.  Writing a book that authors of old would not agree with it being factual. However, the historians of old are well known for penning history in generalities and preferred anecdote to complete factual detail They focused on heroes, heroic events, and the uniqueness of Texas.   
   
   The new social historians,  pore over factual census data and courthouse records and recreate the realities of everyday life.  In this case, it appears they concentrate on issues of race, class, and gender. Which were often glossed over by the big-picture type historians.
   
   I did not read the book, only did a bit of research on the reviews.  hard to give an honest opinion on the actual factuality of the book. But, I never like to see a historical book centered unless someone can point out a true nonfactual representation of history. 
   
   The Governor should stick to governing, and let the historian duke it out if there is any duking out to do.
   
   And Cred, this statement is unfair ---  "Yes, Republicans and conservatives love indoctrination, don't speak of self discovery and independent inquiry to these guys."
   
   Conservatives are against all forms of indoctrination. This is one reason we are seeing so much blowback in Washington. And the. great divide. The rights are against the indoctrination tactics the media is playing out daily.
   And in regard to self-discovery --.IMO  Liberals drift toward groupthink, they are very much followers. When one cause fails they root around for another to offer them a cause. 
   
   In regard to indoctrination, better have a longer look at liberals... Just saying

   replyreport
   1. 90

      crankaliciousposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Huh. Very fair, Sharlee.
      
      History books, unlike political speeches, are written with footnotes. Every history book worth its salt contains tons of primary sourced footnotes so that whoever wants to can check their validity.
      
      For the Governor or anyone to cancel a discussion of a history book's content in a public venue is censorship, pure and simple.

      replyreport
3. 91

   wildernessposted 3 years ago

   "Republican politicians in Texas forced the cancellation of a book talk that questioned the myth of the Alamo."
   
   I'm at a loss to understand where you got the "facts" necessary to make this statement.  Certainly the (Republican) governor is on the BOD, and publicly said he was against it, but that hardly shows that Republican politicians forced the cancellation.  From your link one could conclude that Republicans (with the single exception of the governor) wanted to go ahead with the talk while the Democrat majority of the board forced the cancellation.  Without the political makeup of the BOD, and how voting went down, it would be just as reasonable as assuming that Republicans forced the cancellation.
   
   As your entire diatribe is based on that assumption you might want to rethink it.

   replyreport
   1. 90

      crankaliciousposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Pretty easy to get the "facts".
      
      Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick confirmed on Twitter that he called for the event to be canceled. Abbott, Patrick and other GOP leaders are board members of the State Preservation Board, which oversees the Bullock museum.
      
      https://www.businessinsider.com/texas-g … own-2021-7
      
      Not sure why you would believe otherwise based on the evidence at hand.

      replyreport
      1. 91

         wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

         What facts?  That the governor expressed his displeasure (which I mentioned) and that there were at least 3 GOP members on the board (which I also mentioned)? 
         
         What about the (assumed) 20 Democrat members that overrode the wishes of the GOP members?  What was the vote - how many D's voted to cancel the talk?
         
         Again, you are assuming that the majority was R, and that that was the deciding factor.  An assumption that is NOT supported by your links (although the second one assumes that it was canceled because of political pressure from lawmakers, again without mention of discussion or votes by the BOD).
         
         While I suspect you are correct in your assumption, this kind of "reasoning" is becoming so common as to be the only way to draw a conclusion; use only facts that support the desired conclusion and never, ever look beyond them for anything else.  Once that desired conclusion is drawn, never, ever question it or look any further.

         replyreport
4. 80

   Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years ago

   Inaccurate History is the issue in one sense, but the pinpointing of inaccurate history is the other.
   
   If the purpose of pinpointing inaccurate history is to bring down morale, enthusiasm and general confidence in one's place and one's life ...  well, it is not productive and it's not positive.
   
   Why pinpoint the  n e g i t i v i t y ?
   One reason: to
                               VEX!

   replyreport
   1. 80

      Credence2posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Inaccurate history is inaccurate history, is there not any virtue in having the truth no matter where it leads?

      replyreport
      1. 80

         Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years agoin reply to this

         ... depends on why its being dredged up.

         replyreport
         1. 80

            Credence2posted 3 years agoin reply to this

            It is not a matter of why but a matter of "what is and what is not"

            replyreport
            1. 80

               Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years agoin reply to this

               There is an agenda, and this is OBVIOUS

               replyreport
      2. 92

         MizBejabbersposted 3 years agoin reply to this

         Now there's a statement that I agree with! We were good little sheep when I was a kid. It is refreshing to find out the truth now that I'm grown. However, most people are unwilling to give up their myths and don't accept the truth when it bites them on the butt.

         replyreport
         1. 80

            Credence2posted 3 years agoin reply to this

            Yep, how long did it take for me to discredit the existence of the "tooth fairy" and her exchanging my tooth for a quarter while I slept?

            replyreport
            1. 92

               MizBejabbersposted 3 years agoin reply to this

               Back to our inaccurate history. I think the myths with which we were raised to believe perpetuated a group arrogance that led us to think the U.S. was perfect and infallible. This caused our leaders to make many mistakes that we look back upon, some of them with shame, Vietnam War, for instance. We are now finding out the truth that we are not perfect and infallible, and it is a shock to our "perfect little egos."
               
               "Make America Great Again" was a futile attempt to go back to these mythical days.

               replyreport
               1. 80

                  Credence2posted 3 years agoin reply to this

                  That group arrogance elevated an idea and concept to the detriment of others.
                  
                  Make America Great Again" is a myth that even if true when using a certain yardstick cannot be recreated.

                  replyreport
5. 80

   Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years ago

   Down with VEXING!

   replyreport
6. 80

   Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years ago

   We were on a positive path.
   Now we are not.
   Thanks for 
   
                 NOTHING

   replyreport
7. 80

   Credence2posted 3 years ago

   Your opinion of what is a positive path is far beyond what is the whole story.
   
   I don't like being subjected to lies to protect a wrong headed and inaccurate system and agenda. So, kumbaya may not be around the corner when we cannot be honest and show respect to with one another, at a minimum.
   
   And, I will have the TRUTH even if the heavens themselves may fall.

   replyreport