Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

When is WHITE history month?

page: 21
78
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 09:02 AM
link   
I think this month just makes "white" Jane, see her friend Tanisha, as her black friend Tanisha. It simply creates an unneeded race barrier. Just because Dewan is black, and some other black person in the past was a slave does not mean Dewan was a slave. That's the same as saying if some black guy is a crack seller, then Dewan must be also. It's not good, and it's not right.




posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 01:10 PM
link   
I think November should be Native American History Month! Since Thanksgiving is in that month it would be a good fit. That way people would be reminded that Thanksgiving was when Natives saved the pilgrims by showing them how to farm the land and survive and in return they get killed off for their kindness. The Natives need a month for their real history to be exposed. I mean how many Native Americans do you see in a day?? I see whites, blacks everywhere. So stop complaining about when is WHITE history month. Everyday is about white history. My family is the only Oglala Sioux people in my city that I know of. Try being the only members of your race in a city. Then you can complain.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 01:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by drunkasshole
reply to post by alienspOtter77
 


were blacks the only people that were slaves in history? do research, whites were slaves to, we dont want to say "you enslaved my ancestors. i want reperations" learn some history outside of america. i mean, damn.


Good point. The Dutch didn't invent slavery. It was being done between tribes on the African coast forever, long before any 'whites' landed there. That's one of the way's they survived. Native americans did it too. I'm sure early man did too.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 02:18 PM
link   
reply to post by wrkn4livn
 


Lets be clear on this statement. Yes slavery was used by majority of tribes, be it African or Native American.
The difference is it was never exploited on a large scale. Native Americans did not buy or sale slaves. It was usually warriors from another tribe that were caught during a time of war and in some cases they were traded between tribes as a gesture of peace between the two tribes that were at war. It was never a case of one race being inferior and less than. Do your research on this subject. They were not the same thing.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 02:28 PM
link   
reply to post by sonofliberty1776
 


Why is it that only Africans & Muslims gang rape women in Norway & Sweden?



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Common Scarecrow
REPLY TO "TheWalkingFox"



You said ....... "It's not a quota system. It's not a discriminatory system."

I think YOU are the one who needs to do research on the term"affirmative action".

FACT: Most of my life I have worked for companies where the majority of the work was military in nature. I hate to be the one to break the news to you, but they are required to have in their employ a certain percentage of minorities to be able to meet the requirements to even bid on government jobs.


Did you, now? What, did you sweep? You certainly weren't working in management or employment, else you would know that your claim here is false. Even when bidding for government contracts, affirmative action is a good-faith, goal-oriented process. Title 41, chapter 60 does give the favor to companies that meet these goals, but you are not entitled to government contract. If your company failed to meet their goals, there was no legal repercussions - no courts, no fines, they just lost the bid to a competitor.

It's not a quota system. You are not required to have any percentage of anyone. However there is the expectation, out of an honor system, that you will seek qualified applications from women and minorities.


You said ....... "The reason there are no "calls for affirmative action" in the NFL, NBA, whatever, is exactly like you said; the people there are the people who are most qualified."

My question is, why should that same standard not apply to EVERY facet of life?


It does. See, that's the whole crux of affirmative action. It only counts people who are qualified for employment in that position. A Mexican strawberry picker can't walk into the hospital straight from the field, say "I want to be a brain surgeon," and expect to actually be hired just because he's Hispanic. This, however, seems to be exactly what you believe. Either that, or you think nonwhites and women are inherently "less qualified" and that all of them who are employed are simply there because of some imaginary "quota system."


You said ....... "If you have a black ancestor, you're black in America."

Funny, I have never heard that "rule" before, unless maybe you are talking about the KKK mentality, which I hardly think prevails these days.


You haven't? Well, lucky you. But it's the way it works in our culture. Barack Obama is "black." Colin Powell is also "black." Charlie Rangel, yup, he's "black." Lawrence Fishburne? Also "black!" Beyonce? "Black." Halle Berry, she's "black" too.

Race works funny in this country, and a lot of it makes little sense (such as the white + Indian mixing ending up with the kid being "white"). It's not the "KKK Mentality" - the KKK is a product of our cultural views on race. An extremist product, to be sure, but it wouldn't exist if there weren't something for it to build on already.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 03:02 PM
link   
reply to post by truthseeker321
 


It is November. Not that anyone ever notices, of course.

Even though we're the fastest-growing demographic in the US (what, do you think speaking Spanish makes you stop being an Indian?
)



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 07:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by consciousrevolutionary
...
imagine yourself growing in a place where white is the minority, all members of power and authority are black. where the majority of top career positions are occupied by blacks, apart for the token white, all things you learn are of african origin and the way they are expressed is not your mothers tongue... you may also cry out for a little of your innate culture...


Actually I have the unique advantage of being a white female having been raised in a predominately African-American populated area, going to a 99% Sfrican-American school k-12, and dealing with them being predominate in areas of power and authority... a rural community. I am using the "white" term loosely, since I am technically part Cherokee, Irish and Scottish... However, I have glow in the dark white skin and so everyone thinks I am "white". I did not realize, as a child, that most of America was reversed or more equal in racial proportions. So, I get the whole I hate racism... but more importantly, I learned it doesn't matter my skin color... but not because the African-American community surrounding me embraced this skinny "white" girl.. no, I was just as astrocized as any so-called minority race because of my skin color and difference in speech. NO ONE is above racism. There is no such thing as reverse racism.... just racism. A hatred or dislike of another based on being a different race or culture.

Try living a day without saying your race or cultural background... if you cannot, then YOU are the problem.

I do not understand why there has to be a month to tell me about Martin Luther King, Harriett Tubman, Rebecca Crumpler (1st black female doctor) and the multitude of other amazing individuals. Our history and knowledge - good and bad - should be recorded without prejudice and spite, no glossing over. It should be there to learn from and, hopefully, not repeat the bad and improve on the good. There should not be any month or day that specifically acknowledges anyone of any culture or race. It should be up to the individual to celebrate his/her cultural heritage, not the entire country.

The duty of the USA, as a whole, should be unbiased education showing the intelligence, ingenuity and range of amazing individuals based on their intelligence and ingenuity - not their race or cultural background. There is no such thing as a pure anything. All Americans are mutts - a mixture of any cultural or racial background you can think of. Heck, anyone alive is not pure ANYTHING. Allotting a time span to celebrate a cultural background or race is a waste of time since there is such a mixture in our American melting pot. Again, each individual should celebrate their cultural heritage EVERYDAY, not just Sunday or January... get the idea? Be proud, but not boastful, of each individual heritage.

Anyway, my not so humble opinion.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 08:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by iameternity

When The Blacks start raping, beating, enslaving, working you to death, OWNING YOUR LIFE FROM BIRTH, and start hanging you like a spectacle so that everybody can see what happens if you even TRY to show some self worth. When this "future history" happens and you overcome the what seems to be impossible odds, then maybe I will have some sympathy to your argument


Not trying to race bait but I hear about "Blacks" raping, beating, and yes, enslaving (holding someone captive), (and gosh!!) even killing. It happens every day. In EVERY race or cultural background.

The whole point is has any of the above statement you made, HAPPENED TO YOU? If so, how? What makes your great great great great.. however many greats back...great grandaddy's troubles your own? Did you somehow get the welts he felt? Did you feel the rape of your great, great, etc great grandmother?

I am by no means saying that enslaving another person is good. Never has been. We still have it going on in America and throughout the world. My point, the only point, is did any of "raping, beating, enslaving, working you to death, OWNING YOUR LIFE FROM BIRTH, and start hanging you like a spectacle " happen to you? Please give a specific example.

Sincerely



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 10:06 PM
link   
I understand what you are saying, but I have a different (but not too different) argument which I think you would agree with. I think that we shouldn't be placing any individual ethnic group on a pedestal for any amount of time. I think that if the United States is a place where we strive to eliminate racism or tension between races, then we should celebrate what it means to be American. If you are proud of your origins and you want to celebrate that, more power to you, you have a right to celebrate! But it doesn't need to become a national holiday.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 10:14 PM
link   
reply to post by tom goose
 


I will tell you the same thing I tell brown racists. There is no "whiteland" you cant have a white history month because all whites dont share the same history. Blacks in Africa dont either. Asians dont. Middle Easterners dont. You can have a black history month in the US because many of the blacks in the US have a shared historical experience. A common history. But many whites here do not. We all came in in different waves, and we have holidays that reflect those to some degree. We have Thanksgiving for the first wave, we have St Patricks day for the Irish wave, we have Cinco de Mayo for the hispanic wave, we have Octoberfest for the German immigrants.

The blacks hauled in here on ships did not get to keep their individual history, their tribal history was lost to them because of how they were kept, and moved around at the whim of their "owners." Its only fair that they have something to compensate them for the loss of their own true history. No matter how unfairly many whites who immigrated here were treated here and back home, for the most part they got to keep that historical identity.

So just being able to say "Im Scots Irish" is my history. I dont need a month. Most American blacks have no idea, and no real way to find out what tribe they are from. The DNA tests are only so so, and not everyone can afford that.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 11:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by truthseeker321
I think November should be Native American History Month! Since Thanksgiving is in that month it would be a good fit. That way people would be reminded that Thanksgiving was when Natives saved the pilgrims by showing them how to farm the land and survive and in return they get killed off for their kindness. The Natives need a month for their real history to be exposed. I mean how many Native Americans do you see in a day?? I see whites, blacks everywhere. So stop complaining about when is WHITE history month. Everyday is about white history. My family is the only Oglala Sioux people in my city that I know of. Try being the only members of your race in a city. Then you can complain.



To me, everday is about everyone and creation. So I dont think everyday is about white history, or black, indian, and asian history. How are whites so special that now all of a sudden "everyday is about white history"? No race should be thought of that way. We should think of us all as one and the same, because thats the truth. Im not complaining about there not being a white history day or month because personally I wouldn't want one. Although, like many, i've wondered why a race had its own history month. Yet I think its beneficial. Considering we still aren't at the point where we can put everything behind us and literally look to eachother as one. No matter what color. So in a sense I understand why it's that way.

I agree with with the Indian statements because I also have indian in me, not full, but quite a bit. What the Indians went through was wrong, but what was done was done. The government could help them out more today to try in some way to repay them, but they wont do too much of that.



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 02:15 AM
link   
I like your response FPB... leave it at that

second line says if your talking about the problem its because you are the problem...

92+ stars.... SHAME ON YOU



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 04:21 AM
link   
Jan, Mar, Apr, May, Jun, July, Aug, Sep, Oct, Nov, Dec


pretty much every other month.....



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 05:11 AM
link   
reply to post by FPB214
 


As I've mentioned earlier in the thread, this system is pretty much the only way that even fragments of the whole picture get told. There is a very anglo-white leaning bias in history books. It's somewhat less of a problem these days, but that is very probably attributable to the observance of things like Black History Month.

Think about it, though. People like learning things they've never heard of before. And for this huge part of America's history, that history was whites-only. So you take this little bit of something, a few days out of the year and teach about some of the black people in history, some of the things important to the experience of African-Americans, and it's like opening a whole new world, a side of history that a lot of people - even black people - had never known about before. And they want to know more. So they go to the library, or the bookstore, and they find that there's a paucity of books on the subject. So maybe some of the more enterprising historians dig up information, write their own books. Build up the history.

In a lot of cases, things like black history month were a measure to literally halt the destruction of portions of our nation's history. Whether through malicious intent or simple neglect, entire movements that shaped the country, thinkers and statesmen who had moved whole populations, had vanished into thin air and had to be rediscovered. The narrative of history had to be repaired. The black migration from the south to the north and west, between 1914 and 1955, was a nation-changing movement. And it's only just now getting serious historical study and recognition; nearly sixty years after it settled.

Some of the posters on this thread have conjured the image of the poor little white kid who feels "left out" during black history month. ignoring for a moment that black history is completely relevant to whites in America, think of the little black kid in the same history class. Know what the history book looks like to him?

White people, white people, slavery, white people, white people, civil war, white people, white people, white people, white people, civil rights movement, white people, white people.

'Cause that's pretty much the narrative in a school textbook. So you take this kid, and you break up this narrative and show him, even for a short time, some of the magnificent things people like him have accomplished. Show him a portion of the history he's inheriting, that it's not all about Lincoln and Johnson. How do you think he'll react to that? Again, he wants to know more. He feels a little more empowered, a little more confident. Even the bad parts of the history are good for him, as it can help him understand the current state of things more ably.

Same thing with the Indian kid who learns only that his ancestors were mammoth-killing dinks who blundered into a continent, never used it, and then sat around for ten thousand years waiting for white people to come kill them and put the land to "better use" - again, the general narrative in a textbook. Teach him about the Tecumseh League. Teach him about Cahokia. Tell him the truth about Columbus, and the pilgrims. Show him that he comes from people who had stories, who had power and history and cultures and achievements. Do you think he'd perk up a bit?

These observances are as much about history being recovered and repaired as they are about empowering the people who's ancestry lies in that history. There is a massive amount of history that has been lost or fragmented, and there's always more being made that never makes it to the books because of, again, that same bias.A more complete and thorough picture of history is of benefit to everyone, and if the way to achieve that is to designate certain months or days as a time to look at that history, then I'm 100% for it.



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 07:35 AM
link   
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 


I'm not talking about Mexicans. They are not the same as my tribe. We do not speak Spanish. We speak the Sioux language. Its a totally different culture.



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 08:58 AM
link   
One of the things I have noticed about all this is the different in attitude and approach.
Whilst there is a definate positive, upbeat approach to 'Black' history intended to increase the awareness, pride and esteem of Black people and their role in human history, I aslo think it's fair to say that 'white' history is being rebranded in a more negative and slightly more downbeat approach.

The approach is innacurate and incorrect and spreading a version of world events that is just as misrepresentative as that previously told.

To say that 'Black' history concentrates on the positive whilst blatantly ignoring some of it's more unsavoury points is a gross undestatement.
To portray Africa prior to the European colonisation and exploitation as some sort of idyllic and harmonious land where everything and everyone was at peace and in balance is equally as wrong as saying the expansion of Western European values through The Roman Catholic Church and the various Empire's was nothing but beneficial and well intentioned.
White people are increasingly taught to feel guilt for the 'sins of their fathers' and are actively discouraged to display any pride in their heritage.
The exact opposite is true of black people.
Whilst the spread of Empire is certainly immoral when judging by todays standards it is worth saying that it was just 'the norm' throughout history regardless of being White, Black, Chinese etc.
And none of us alive today were a party to any of it.

The 'Black' history taught is also equally selective with little mention of hundreds, if not thousands, of years of internecine racial and tribal warfare that has blighted Africa.
Little different to warfare practiced in Europe.
And does anyone care a thought for the people who were slaughtered and subjugated in the building and governance of the Kingdoms of Axum, Ife, Benin or the rise of Carthage or the Empires of Zimbabwe or Songhai?
And what of the role of African tribes played in capturing people of other tribes and knowingly selling them to overseas slavers for profit and to weaken neighbouring tribes?

The points I am trying to make, probably very poorly, is that no one 'race' has a monopoly on the exploitation of our fellow man.
We are ALL capable of, and have been guilty of, acts that show us in a not too favourable light.
If we are to move forward and learn from the many lessons that history has for us then it is imperative that we apply equal standards and morals at all times and tell the whole truth always, regardless of race or creed or politcal correctness and sensibilities.
Glossing over one set of truths whilst highlighting another set of truths just exposes us to further confrontations further down the line.

People of Afrrican lieneage have much to be proud of, as have those of European and Asian lineage, and we all have much to be ashamed of.

It's time to concentrate on that which binds and unites us, the pre-occupation on our preceived differences is holding us back.



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 09:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by MavRck
Yeah... and where is the

WET ? (White Entertainment Network) ... obviously BLACK ENTERTAINMENT TELEVISION. BET

Or the Caucasion network? (there are many east-indian, etc chnls in my area)

Or any white pride parades? Oh right... KKK took that too far.

Here is the thing, I am not racist. I never was. I think it's ridiculous.

I think it's ridiculous how all of or a great number of ethnicities have 'networks' and whatnot... but probably because i am WHITE.

The answer to your strugglesome question is this... White-man settled this land, and europe... the "minorities" need identifcation and uniquity by having these chennels etc because the REST of everything IS WHITE ...

It's basically "white day" every day.

My vote is for ZERO "pride" parades. Pride is for the inexperienced, unknowledged and naive.

FOX news = WET



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 11:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Freeborn
 


I agree with your statement. Well put. Many focus on the "white" aspect of slavery, when blacks were selling other blacks to the whites for their own benefit.



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
reply to post by FPB214
 


As I've mentioned earlier in the thread, this system is pretty much the only way that even fragments of the whole picture get told. There is a very anglo-white leaning bias in history books. It's somewhat less of a problem these days, but that is very probably attributable to the observance of things like Black History Month.

Think about it, though. People like learning things they've never heard of before. And for this huge part of America's history, that history was whites-only. So you take this little bit of something, a few days out of the year and teach about some of the black people in history, some of the things important to the experience of African-Americans, and it's like opening a whole new world, a side of history that a lot of people - even black people - had never known about before. And they want to know more. So they go to the library, or the bookstore, and they find that there's a paucity of books on the subject. So maybe some of the more enterprising historians dig up information, write their own books. Build up the history.

In a lot of cases, things like black history month were a measure to literally halt the destruction of portions of our nation's history. Whether through malicious intent or simple neglect, entire movements that shaped the country, thinkers and statesmen who had moved whole populations, had vanished into thin air and had to be rediscovered. The narrative of history had to be repaired. The black migration from the south to the north and west, between 1914 and 1955, was a nation-changing movement. And it's only just now getting serious historical study and recognition; nearly sixty years after it settled.

Some of the posters on this thread have conjured the image of the poor little white kid who feels "left out" during black history month. ignoring for a moment that black history is completely relevant to whites in America, think of the little black kid in the same history class. Know what the history book looks like to him?

White people, white people, slavery, white people, white people, civil war, white people, white people, white people, white people, civil rights movement, white people, white people.

'Cause that's pretty much the narrative in a school textbook. So you take this kid, and you break up this narrative and show him, even for a short time, some of the magnificent things people like him have accomplished. Show him a portion of the history he's inheriting, that it's not all about Lincoln and Johnson. How do you think he'll react to that? Again, he wants to know more. He feels a little more empowered, a little more confident. Even the bad parts of the history are good for him, as it can help him understand the current state of things more ably.

Same thing with the Indian kid who learns only that his ancestors were mammoth-killing dinks who blundered into a continent, never used it, and then sat around for ten thousand years waiting for white people to come kill them and put the land to "better use" - again, the general narrative in a textbook. Teach him about the Tecumseh League. Teach him about Cahokia. Tell him the truth about Columbus, and the pilgrims. Show him that he comes from people who had stories, who had power and history and cultures and achievements. Do you think he'd perk up a bit?

These observances are as much about history being recovered and repaired as they are about empowering the people who's ancestry lies in that history. There is a massive amount of history that has been lost or fragmented, and there's always more being made that never makes it to the books because of, again, that same bias.A more complete and thorough picture of history is of benefit to everyone, and if the way to achieve that is to designate certain months or days as a time to look at that history, then I'm 100% for it.


Well if that's what the history book looks like to him, than I feel sorry. They must have left out the part where the slaves own race sold them off. Maybe its because my skin is white, but I look at history, every part of it from the dawn of time, as a great feat for mankind. For the human race. Sure, it's important to learn about your individual race and the history that is behind it, but in the end it's important to look at ourselves as one. This is our planet, and we are all together. Thats how I see it anyways. I dont know how old you are, and what history book you have read, but from the very beginning of my history learning in school the first thing we learned about Native Americans was their generosity to help save the settlers and help them get by on the land by teaching them their ways. I learned these people were caring, not morons who needed to be killed because they did not know what to do with the land. Like I said, what is done is done and honestly, like everything else, it was meant to be for some reason or another. The truth about Colombus is, he didn't discover America. Native Americans have more than likely been on the North American Continent for a very long time, alot longer than a few hundred years ago. Fact is, many kids my age today, be it black/white don't care about history. They would rather try to make sure they fit in with the rest of the gang before they worry about going out and reading and learning about history. Wish it wasn't the truth.









 
78
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join