It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


National White History Month

page: 5
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in


posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 06:37 PM
reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984

Awesome post.
I couldn't agree more.

posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 09:42 AM
It's amazing to hear folks complain about not having "white history month". Its called "history" in America. Black people have endured every bit of treatment that teabaggers and other "conservatives" say the government is "going" to do. Blacks have been enslaved, not allowed to control the economics of their own community (even today), denied education (please note the civil rights era of many whites protesting blacks going to schools or living in certain neighborhoods.), attacked by police/national guard and other military.

And now in 2010 someone is complaining that they have a history month. It's laughable. If American history were told from the perspective of African Americans there is no way 911 would be considered the first terrorist attack on American soil. The American government sanctioned terrorism against blacks for most of America's history. Allowing a black history month is a mere pittance toward what would rightfully be deserved. When you consider the black community economically very little of the economy is controlled by black people. (Hell even the BET that most complain about having no white counterpart for isn't owned by someone black anymore hence its decline since it was sold.

If ever there was true history in America it would show how terroristic America has been toward blacks. The Affirmative action that folks complain about being unfair to whites doesn't nearly level the playing field to remedy the economic atrocities committed against blacks in this nation. And now people complain "it's unfair to whites". What the real complaint is that many feel its unfair to whites if they don't have an advantage. Anything done to remedy that advantage is deemed unfair. When slavery was ended, many fought it because it would be unfair to whites. When there was to be 40 acres and a mule for blacks after slavery, it wasn't given because it would be "unfair" to whites. Now fast forward to 2010 and the problem isnt finding a remedy for the terrorism committed against African Americans it's whites complaining that the partial pittance of a remedy that Affirmative action has been (as it was designed to remedy racism, but it includes white females as its largest recipient) is too much and unfair to whites. Blacks represent under 14% of the population and black businesses get under 9% of government contracts, yet many whites complain that it's because of Affirmative action that their businesses aren't getting government contracts.

It's almost laughable.

posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 09:52 AM
reply to post by nphillydude

Yes, but blacks have also been left out in affirmative action, because of the influx of other races from many different countries!
I mean, it was useful for a while, but when we get people from other countries to come over here for a job, ALL AMERICANS are left out!
We should have an American history month and take care of America first, before becoming so multicultural!

edit to add: I TOTALLY agree with you about blacks having been the recipients of the NWO-type horrors.
But, A LOT of white, poor people in the south where I'm from, didn't use slave labor or even want it!
They were simple farmers, not plantation owners.
In the 30's and 40's my granddad would take extra produce and go give it to poor families and most were black families.
He was in the KKK and in west Georgia, they were ONLY against wife-beaters, child molesters and the NWO.

[edit on 10-1-2010 by Clearskies]

posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 10:02 AM
I made a joke suggesting what you did just yesterday. How about we get rid of history (his-story) altogether and just document the chronology of humanity? Given the tools we have today I think we can dump all history and write the human story where we see both sides presented of all past events; both winners and losers. As for celebrating any particular race, ethnicity, religion or creed I say
There can be no real equality among us as long as we keep picking out particular groups this way.

posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 10:17 AM
reply to post by Clearskies

The issue isn't that "All whites" owned slaves or if you want to fast forward to the 60's,70's that "all whites" stood at schools denying blacks entry to education or housing. It was never done by all whites. But it primarily happened to "all blacks". So even the whites that didn't cause it benefitted from not having to endure it as blacks did. Once slavery ended, blacks were arrested for being black (black codes) and on the street after certain hours. Those arrested were leased back to plantations. So though slavery ended there was still slave labor via black codes and convict leasing. Today convict labor is still leased to corporations. Do we really believe blacks represent a larger part of the prison population because they commit more crimes as 14 % of the general population? If we review the prison stats historically we will learn that blacks became a larger percentage of the prison population during the same period of the civil rights movement. Prior to this time the majority of prisons were filled with whites. So did whites become less criminal? (I'd say not as what white society and the American government sanctioned against blacks is definitely criminal in terms of being a human rights violation). So again did whites simply stop committing crimes? Did they find Jesus LOL? Did blacks all of a sudden start committing more crimes?

If you remove black history you remove the true story of what has been done to blacks in the Americas. If you come up with a "white" history it will be redundant with american history. Blacks were denied their history and that is why there is black history month. Whites were never denied their history.

Even the movie "Roots" was altered from Alex Haley's story to make whites appear more "friendly" toward blacks so that it wouldn't be offensive to white audiences.

We have throughout American history "whitewashed" the history to make it more palatable to white society. Unless you plan to remove that white wash there is a need for Black history. Its the story of the history of America from a black perspective which is completely different from that of the dominant group in America. Whites are the dominant group. There is no need for a "white history". When a bunch of Chinese people live together we call it "Chinatown". When a bunch of whites live together it's simply a city. This is because whites are the dominant group in American history.

There's no need for a white history. We have it it's American history.

posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 10:28 AM
reply to post by nphillydude

I watched the story of Chuck Barry, yesterday. With Cedric the entertainer. The police beat them and they were taken advantage of.
ANY TIME people are reduced to sub-humans, like blacks have been, (Now southern hicks and rednecks), enemy combatants, they are not provided the same rights as others!

WE have a 'war on terror', instead of a concrete war on a nation, because we can then reduce the rights of ANYONE who is from afghanistan, Iraq and others using the Patriot Act.
We have circumvented the Geneva Accord and it's SHAMEFUL!!!!!

new topics

<< 2  3  4   >>

log in