It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump's Assault on History

page: 3
19
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 12:49 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

The last time I went there were many people there. And the local library has an awesome collection of comic books.




posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 12:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I just have one question for people here when is the last time you went to a library? They actually closed my local library because well no one went. You have the ability to access the internet and it has more information than any library. I personally read ebooks on my tablet its just easier. So why do we want to continue funding an outdated technology. Kind of like selling movies on Betamax very few will use them.

www.bbc.com...



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 12:50 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

That does not negate the point that about access, or books, or people who need these services. Why don't you try visiting a library.

There is a difference between a simple cell phone and a smart phone.

The number of phones does not mean that that is the number of phones in *use* or owned and activated.



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 12:51 PM
link   
a reply to: SirHardHarry




Why don't you try visiting a library.


Because I don't have too.

Between ebooks, and the internets.



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 12:54 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96


Because I don't have too.

Between ebooks, and the internets.


And some people do have to.

Because not all books are digitized and not everyone has internet access. As I've said before.

Jesus Christ...



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 12:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: SirHardHarry
a reply to: neo96


People don't have to go anywhere.

And they can access what ever information they want from a smart phone,tablet or pc.


Do you not read well?

Not everything has been digitized; not everyone has a smart phone, tablet, or internet access from home.

Libraries provide those services.


Ah the old poor people dont have internet access garbage. They do Its very hard to find someone who cant access the internet if they choose to. Even my local mall has free wifi and with smart phones available your perpetuating a myth.



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 01:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Meh, all history is propaganda, at least according to my son who points out that history is almost always written by the winners of conflicts. As far as the history angle is concerned, I'd think that for the majority of the "general population" of the US, saving history is rather pointless........they can't see much past Facebook and their I-Phone screens.

As to the libraries, I used to be like you and would vehemently fight to preserve the libraries. However, recent trips to our regional library, which is quite nice, have taught me that they have become very much politically oriented one sided centers of propaganda. I live in a heavily Hispanic region, about 75% and they were none too happy to see the likes of ME in their library. And I might add, the Spanish language section of the Library was nearly as large as the English language section. I don't really care; I can get what I want to off the Internet or from Amazon.



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 01:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Idiotic ?

Statues of men that stood up to federalism is idiotic ?

You do realize that the Confederates are a bunch of traitors to the country right? By all accounts we shouldn't be pretending like they were heroes at all. Even if you remove the slavery angle (which I really have trouble doing). So yes. I consider the Confederacy idiotic.


A reminder that no one gets to leave the United States of Mafios isn't idiotic.

You are 100% welcome to leave this country if you don't like it neo.


A reminder of a time when brother fought against brother, isn't idiotic.

A reminder of a time when this nation torn itself a part and still hasn't healed it's wounds isn't idiotic.

Remembering the Civil War is a BIT different than glorifying the Confederacy JUST because it existed.

Do you think the citizens of Columbine should erect a statue to the shooters of that high school just because it happened and so we don't forget?



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 01:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: SirHardHarry
a reply to: neo96


People don't have to go anywhere.

And they can access what ever information they want from a smart phone,tablet or pc.


Do you not read well?

Not everything has been digitized; not everyone has a smart phone, tablet, or internet access from home.

Libraries provide those services.


Ah the old poor people dont have internet access garbage. . . . Even my local mall has free wifi and with smart phones available your perpetuating a myth.


It's not a myth. For some, the library is the only place to access the internet.


Its very hard to find someone who cant access the internet if they choose to.


Hence, LIBRARIES and part of my initial point in this thread.



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 01:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t




You do realize that the Confederates are a bunch of traitors to the country right? By all accounts we shouldn't be pretending like they were heroes at all.


No more than Lincoln that was just as big a racist as the south supposedly was.

Suspension of constitutional rights, and everything else that went on.

All I hear is fake outrage when it comes to all things 'confederate' after the wholesale slaughter of the brown man.

Tell me why historians never reconcile the cognitive disconnect of that era?



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 01:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
No, that's institutionalized history--the type of history that can be spun and molded to for a historical picture that may or may not reflect reality in its totality.

Um... No... Primary sources (the type of sources that museums handle) are DIRECT sources. You can't get less untainted by bias than a primary source.


Historical statues, street names, marker, references, etc., that exists outside of the institutionalized places you mention are the things that drive real historical research, not some teachers telling you what you have to research just to write a paper about a subject that you can forget about later because it's generally not put into any historical context that actually matters.

No. This is just idolatry. Historians don't walk down a street, see a street named "JFK Boulevard", then immediately go "AHA! Now I'll go study JFK!" No. They are inspired by other historical veins they are researching or they uncover a manuscript that he wrote (again primary source).

In fact, statues and the like are where history is distorted the worst. Statues rarely ever depict a bad side of someone. They are meant to show how great someone is. Well that is textbook distorted history. No human is without flaws, but going by statues you'd think that people like George Washington or Abe Lincoln never did any wrong.

Getting your history from statues is bush league historical research.


Full disclosure: I wrote my response above before even reading this paragraph, and I'm glad that I did, because it reinforces what I'm about to say--federal funding of museums and libraries (other than federal museums and libraries) is not a necessary role of the federal government, and therefore should be cut.

$230-Million dollars is cited in your linked op-ed piece--in a nation of nearly 320-Million people. If even 1/5 of our citizenry were willing to donate $5/year (and I guarantee more would be willing to donate even more than that), we would exceed in private donations what the federal government was providing. It can be funded privately, hence my aversion to supporting the federal funding.

What a hypocrite. You care so much about a stupid statue, but you don't care enough to preserve actual history. Instead leave it up to donations. Sure, I'm sure that will save SOME of those 35,000 museums but it won't be all of them. There WILL be lost history no matter how you slice it with your approach, and there will be FAR more lost history in one museum being closed down versus one statue moved.

Well your words here make me believe that your words about caring about our heritage as hollow..


No, it's not, as noted above.

And from what I've seen in my area's libraries lately, it's not the non-fiction, historical books being checked out, but video games, movies, and teens using the computers to access the internet for social-media purposes. I think that your view that people flock to the libraries to learn about history is a flawed foundation on which to base your support for federal funding.

History is just but one function of libraries. Libraries also function as a source to read, learn to read, educate children, and other stuff.


You're making a false-equivalency logical fallacy, here, as the two are not the same. Show me where a lack of federal funding (that can easily be replaced with voluntary donations in a dramatic portion of those areas affected) will cause the loss of these books. I mean, if the funding is cut, will all of the libraries and museums fire up the wood chippers, fire pits, and shredders?

I think we both know the answer to that question.

I think you are lying to yourself if you think that 100% of the libraries and 100% of the museums will be able to stay open without this funding.



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 01:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I just have one question for people here when is the last time you went to a library? They actually closed my local library because well no one went. You have the ability to access the internet and it has more information than any library. I personally read ebooks on my tablet its just easier. So why do we want to continue funding an outdated technology. Kind of like selling movies on Betamax very few will use them.

www.bbc.com...



I used to go to my library all the time a few years back in order to GET on the internet. Not everyone has the internet, plus while I was there, there were people in and out of the libraries all over Baltimore for all sorts of reasons. Your libraries may have closed due to no use, but they are booming in Bmore.



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 01:24 PM
link   
Here we are debating the finer points of whether or not historical-based entities should remain funded or not, but I don't seem to recall any threads regarding the finer points of funding Trump's war on Syria, the cost of his multiple vacations and housing costs of family.

Says something, doesn't it.



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 01:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: TonyS
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Meh, all history is propaganda, at least according to my son who points out that history is almost always written by the winners of conflicts. As far as the history angle is concerned, I'd think that for the majority of the "general population" of the US, saving history is rather pointless........they can't see much past Facebook and their I-Phone screens.

Yes and no. I can see why your son would have this opinion because it is true that ALL history taught in grade school history class is propaganda. HOWEVER, there is a big difference between college taught history and grade school history. Even more so when it comes to studying cutting edge historical primary documents.

The biggest difference between grade school history and college history is that grade school history approaches the topic as a series of events. A happened then B then C leaving little room for nuance. College level approaches the topic as a series of conflicts. Two or more parties contesting for popular opinion and direction of their country. There are pros and cons to each argument and rarely a distinct moral superiority between them.

The reason I agree with your son is because I used to think like he did when I was in grade school. Then I got to college and I took those history classes and even the 100 series classes are on a different level. They allow you to come to your own conclusions about how you feel those events in our past were handled.


As to the libraries, I used to be like you and would vehemently fight to preserve the libraries. However, recent trips to our regional library, which is quite nice, have taught me that they have become very much politically oriented one sided centers of propaganda. I live in a heavily Hispanic region, about 75% and they were none too happy to see the likes of ME in their library. And I might add, the Spanish language section of the Library was nearly as large as the English language section. I don't really care; I can get what I want to off the Internet or from Amazon.

See. The libraries in Baltimore are pretty lively and except for a few in questionable neighborhoods most are pretty good.
edit on 24-4-2017 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 01:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Krazysh0t
No more than Lincoln that was just as big a racist as the south supposedly was.

Being a racist and being a traitor aren't the same thing neo. Thus they aren't interchangeable. Yes Lincoln was what we'd call a racist today, but he didn't pitch a bitch fit and leave the nation because he lost the bid for the Presidency like the Confederacy did.


Suspension of constitutional rights, and everything else that went on.

I never said I agreed with everything Lincoln did, but again it trumps the Confederacy's behavior. Plus there is one thing that Lincoln DID do that he damn well never needed to do. Reaccept the Confederate states without punishing their leadership for treason.


All I hear is fake outrage when it comes to all things 'confederate' after the wholesale slaughter of the brown man.

Tell me why historians never reconcile the cognitive disconnect of that era?

Because you don't actually study history and don't truly know if this is a valid question to ask.
edit on 24-4-2017 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 02:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Um... No... Primary sources (the type of sources that museums handle) are DIRECT sources. You can't get less untainted by bias than a primary source.

This is just one piece of the history puzzle, although a large piece...I might even say the corner pieces.

And in my opinion, the museum pieces, if left in situ and visited there, would be primary sources. Extracted artifacts cleaned up, categorized, and interpreted are not necessarily 'primary sources' in that regard. Don't get me wrong--I love visiting history museums on occasion, but they are not infallible or perfect in their exhibits (although most are very, very good). And by displaying them, most of the time out-of-context, it doesn't help create the big picture as much as supplement and punctuate the big picture.

But of course, not all museums are created equal, and some are great where others fall well short of much value.


No. This is just idolatry. Historians don't walk down a street, see a street named "JFK Boulevard", then immediately go "AHA! Now I'll go study JFK!" No. They are inspired by other historical veins they are researching or they uncover a manuscript that he wrote (again primary source).

No, that is your own subjective opinion on how life works. I've lived in a few historical cities (and when I lived in Wurzburg, Germany, a very historical city), and the names of streets and buildings and statues ALWAYS made me research more into them so that I had a good grasp of the local history.

I also know many people who would walk right past an original copy of the Declaration of Independence (primary source) without giving it a second glance, but would look up the history of Jay-Z just because Obama invited him to the White House.

There are many avenues through which someone researches and learns history--libraries and museums are just one of those avenues. Monuments, street names, town names, historical markers on the road side (which I always stop to read), television documentaries, terrible based-on-real-events movies, etc., are also valid ways to learn and to spark further investigation, which may or may not lead you to a museum or library.

And BTW...when did this suddenly just become about historians? I love researching history, but I'm not a historian. Let's not narrow down the field of people about whom we're talking just to try and make a valid point.


In fact, statues and the like are where history is distorted the worst. Statues rarely ever depict a bad side of someone. They are meant to show how great someone is. Well that is textbook distorted history. No human is without flaws, but going by statues you'd think that people like George Washington or Abe Lincoln never did any wrong.

Getting your history from statues is bush league historical research.

Did I ever state or imply that statues should be one's only avenue of research?

(The answer is "no.")


What a hypocrite. You care so much about a stupid statue, but you don't care enough to preserve actual history. Instead leave it up to donations. Sure, I'm sure that will save SOME of those 35,000 museums but it won't be all of them. There WILL be lost history no matter how you slice it with your approach, and there will be FAR more lost history in one museum being closed down versus one statue moved.

There is no hypocrisy in citing why the federal government shouldn't fund libraries and museums--they shouldn't fund statues, either, IMO. Just because I didn't initially say that doesn't mean that I'm a hypocrite.

Are ancient statues of sphinxes, or pharaohs, or emperors, or Chinese warriors just "stupid statues?" No, and they still exist because cultures didn't remove/dismantle them. These claimed "stupid statues" are the "primary sources" for the next civilizations' museums.


Well your words here make me believe that your words about caring about our heritage as hollow..

Believe what you want; I sincerely don't care. Maybe your words about "stupid statues" mean that you don't care about preserving history? Probably not, right? Even though it could be twisted that way?


History is just but one function of libraries. Libraries also function as a source to read, learn to read, educate children, and other stuff.

I know--I have children, and we frequent the library relatively often. And I would step up to support the library if I needed to (and often do, when they have book sales and the like to raise money to fund some of the programs that they do, or I pay entry donations to exhibits that they have on site, etc.).


I think you are lying to yourself if you think that 100% of the libraries and 100% of the museums will be able to stay open without this funding.

I never said that I think that 100% of anything will remain open without the funding. Where did you come up with that? All that I said is that the funding could be replaced by private donations if yadda yadda yadda. You're creating a false narrative of my comment, and it's not the first time during this response to me.

But to be fair, I think that you're lying to yourself in believing that, without federal funds, history will be lost. Things don't just disintegrate when federal dollars stop flowing in...the artifacts, books, and the like will still exist. Just because there's a chance that they may not always exist in the same place is not tantamount to the loss of history.



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 02:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
But to be fair, I think that you're lying to yourself in believing that, without federal funds, history will be lost. Things don't just disintegrate when federal dollars stop flowing in...the artifacts, books, and the like will still exist. Just because there's a chance that they may not always exist in the same place is not tantamount to the loss of history.

If you think I'm lying to myself about that, then you and other conservatives are lying to yourselves about history lost due to a statue being moved or a street renamed.



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 02:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t
And there's your sign...so I'm a conservative, eh?


You just keep making up false narratives about me, don't you? I hate history. I don't care about our heritage. I think that "stupid statues" are the only way to learn history.

Jesus--enough. You aren't getting anything right about me, so just stop with the assumptions and, I guess, move on to someone else.
edit on 24-4-2017 by SlapMonkey because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 02:39 PM
link   
I think everyone(Trump included) knows the value of preserving history. But when you have a crumbling infrastructure because of the pipe dreams of a bunch of bureaucrats you have to make cuts. Somehow the OP and this news rag concluded that Trump is trying to silence or re-write history or something. Museums which I don't rely on daily can take a back seat to the infrastructure I use daily like roads.

First it was "Trumps war on Art" then "Trumps war on science" now "Trumps war on history".
What's next on the agenda OP?



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 02:47 PM
link   
really bums me out reading some say that this is the digital age and we dont need libraries anymore because we have google.
that basically sucks...

google should not be an acceptable replacement for books.

as others have mentioned it is not just checking out books from the library. there is other media there as well. periodicals.
family nights. craft events for young kids. classes for adults for all sorts of things.

we need to keep those around....
shame



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join