When is WHITE history month?

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

log in

join

posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 11:26 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.



It's called Country Music Television (CMT). Just because it doesn't hold the name "White" in it doesn't mean that it doesn't serve the same purpose. And lets not forget that MTV once was the EXACT opposite of BET. They both since gone separate ways in programming which I'm not supportive of.




posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by tom goose
No way. Black history month seems to celebrate black history BEFORE America. I don't mean to sound mean but if were only black America history wouldn't there be more black only water fountains, cotton, and everyone saying boss. I think they want to forget their history in America and celebrate the history that came with them from Africa.

I am Canadian by the way, sure i have some German, British, and even Lebanese background. I have never lived in those places.... I AM Canadian....*crack..fzzzz*


You must be pretty uneducated on this topic. Hardly anything that's taught in our schools during Black History Month deals with Africa. It deals with the struggles that my ancestors went through and the people that helped make a change. Even the doings of Abraham Lincoln are mentioned as being significant factors of why I'm here able to work alongside of white people in the Air Force. It also talks about how blacks weren't able to be pilots in the Air Force. Really man... do some research and learn about what really happens during black history month.

And by the way... schools only take 1 month out of the entire shool year to mention these things. While the rest of American History (White History) is talked about ALL year. They don't even mention slavery etc. until February comes around. And yes, all of that is an important part of making AMERICAN HISTORY.



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by SilentKillah
It's called Country Music Television (CMT). Just because it doesn't hold the name "White" in it doesn't mean that it doesn't serve the same purpose. And lets not forget that MTV once was the EXACT opposite of BET. They both since gone separate ways in programming which I'm not supportive of.


CMT, in my opinion, is not like BET. BET shows anything and everything about the black culture. CMT is country. I never watch CMT, and never have and im white, I just don't like the country music. If it was about the white culture it would show more aspects than just country. As for MTV, when were they the exact opposite of BET? Ever since MTV has been around it has been about music in general, not a particular race. No race is left out on MTV today. That's why it poisons every race.

Also, back in school I learned about slavery throughout the year, not just in February. Whenever that time of American History would come around, such as the revolutionary/civil war slavery was a part of every aspect of it.
edit on 16-2-2011 by FPB214 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 11:58 AM
link   
reply to post by FPB214
 



I agree that all black or all female organizations are discriminatory, and they should be done away with. Just sue the crap out of them, every chance you get. Slap them with lawsuits, complaints to whatever agency, whatever it takes. Just ride them hard. You dont end discrimination with more of it. There may have been some good reasoning to allow that for a period of time, but its gone past that time, and now its just abusing generations of white people who never lived during segregation.

It just needs to end, or white racism needs to come back. We need to play the same game. We can play the game of "lets all be one group" and stop the act of discrimination for superficial reasons. (Gender, color, ethnicity) Or we can play an open game of "competition between groups," and go the natural selection route.

I personally dont care which game we play, I am just about fair. Whichever we decide upon we need to ensure both teams are playing by the same rules.



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 11:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by tom502

Originally posted by Zoyd23
Heritage week is an excellent suggestion....as an old white guy from north of the mason dixon line, I'd like to remember my white ancestors who fought to free slaves during that week, rather than being reminded of the ugliness that occurred at the hands of truly ignorant people. Many whites also for fought hard throughout the 20th century for civil rights--for all people. When a news organization continue to spew specials tltled, "Black in America" or "Hispanic in America" or "Muslim in America" I instantly see racist, anti-white tendencies and turn them off...I will never look at those organization (CNN, ABC, CBS, MSNBC, etc) as either fair or balanced--I see them as promoters of racism.



I brought up the idea of a Heritage Month, for everyone. And I agree with your post. I think the anti-white haters purposely keep facts hidden from the leftist kids and blackists, that there were black slave owners in the US, that slavery originated in Africa from black Africans. And while yes there was segregation in the past, and bad things, the answer to them is not lies and more self segregation. It's unity. NAACP, the black klan, should be renamed as the National Association for the Advancement of ALL People United. Racism only breeds more racism. And while this month, the public schools push their anti-white agendas with this Black History Month, the little white kids are disenfranchised, with nothing for their race. It's simply wrong, and shows how the US seeks to keep the people divided and have a hidden agenda. And let's not forget, it was blacks, that enslaved blacks, and it was whites that freed blacks. And if blacks(I know not all) claim to be sensitive to the "past", even though none of it happened to THEM, then it should be just as valid for whites today, to be sensitive about the current high black crime rate, unfathered children, how the vast majority of inter-racial crimes have a white victim. I mean, all this anti-white racism, is only fueling a national discontent and division, and sadly, the powers that be, I believe, have this all planned out to be so, and it's too easy to get sucked into it.


NAACP is a jacked up group if you ask me. I agree with that statement.



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 12:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by FPB214

Originally posted by SilentKillah
It's called Country Music Television (CMT). Just because it doesn't hold the name "White" in it doesn't mean that it doesn't serve the same purpose. And lets not forget that MTV once was the EXACT opposite of BET. They both since gone separate ways in programming which I'm not supportive of.


CMT, in my opinion, is not like BET. BET shows anything and everything about the black culture. CMT is country. I never watch CMT, and never have and im white, I just don't like the country music. If it was about the white culture it would show more aspects than just country. As for MTV, when were they the exact opposite of BET? Ever since MTV has been around it has been about music in general, not a particular race. No race is left out on MTV today. That's why it poisons every race.

Also, back in school I learned about slavery throughout the year, not just in February. Whenever that time of American History would come around, such as the revolutionary/civil war slavery was a part of every aspect of it.
edit on 16-2-2011 by FPB214 because: (no reason given)


From what I've seen on CMT, it's the purely a "White" station. I can understand that you feel it's not the same as BET. But from an opposite perspective, I feel that it's pretty close to it. BET does exactly what you said today... yes, however in my younger years (17 or so years ago), I remember watching BET and pretty much it was solely black music videos all day. MTV was the exact opposite because all they showed were white music videos all day. And Bevis and Butthead of course. Nowdays, both BET and MTV are doing different things that I do like and I don't watch either of them anymore.

I am in NO way implying that MTV leaves a race out TODAY, but back in the past they did. MTV was a great station to me when they were doing a lot of the funny stuff like Next, and those dating shows. That's when I watched MTV the most.

When it comes to the schools, my school systems were different. I went to schools in Youngstown, OH, Orlando, FL, and PG County, MD, and the only time that black history was discussed was in the month of February. Maybe a few little statements about a black person, but it didn't ever discuss the significance on American History that it had.



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 12:19 PM
link   
it is so funny hearing people complain about what month is white month, what month is black month... Can who really cares what race has a tv channel or not.. The whole thing is, while you all are making this a race topic, do you think the Government really cares what color you are when Taxes are due, what race you are when there is a war to fight... NO...

What has happened in the past is just that... PAST!!! I am so sick of people pulling and using the race card.. It does not matter in my book what color people are, where they came from.. It depends on when the #$^% hits the fan, who is willing to pull together as the Human race and stop looking at peoples skin tone..

If people stop just for a little bit, look around... People robbing others, killing, race profiling, war, hunger, kids being abused, there are so many other topics not being talked about, so many other topics not being handled...

As for my color, well, I will stand next to anyone who will do the same for me..... I bleed red...

Are you any better than me???



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
 

It just needs to end, or white racism needs to come back. We need to play the same game. We can play the game of "lets all be one group" and stop the act of discrimination for superficial reasons. (Gender, color, ethnicity) Or we can play an open game of "competition between groups," and go the natural selection route.

I personally dont care which game we play, I am just about fair. Whichever we decide upon we need to ensure both teams are playing by the same rules.


So... you're saying that white racism doesn't exist? See below... happened in another forum just a few days ago.


Hey so I moved into a new place where a few big Tongans/Samoans live down the street. I know they do some shady stuff already so I have decided to get a bike alarm, considering only one of them has to come lift the bikes front wheel up and roll it into their garage. Any suggestions?


But there was no reason for the "race" to be thrown in there... he could have just said "some shady people live down the street"

Another guy's response to someone pointing out that it was a racist comment.


If a group of people in my neighborhood came up to me, not knowing me, asked me if I wanted to buy drugs, I would assume that they care so little for the law that they would have no issues stealing my s***. I would probably refer to them by their "ethnic group" as well, I dunno, it just comes out like that.


Don't you think there's a problem if people can state that refering to an entire ethnic group as being "big" and "shady" simply because a few of them possibly asked him if he wanted drugs? So basically the same "game" is already being played right?
edit on 16-2-2011 by SilentKillah because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 01:23 PM
link   
reply to post by jmknapp76
 


Amen my friend.



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by FPB214
Well if that's what the history book looks like to him, than I feel sorry.


That's actually the way they're written.


They must have left out the part where the slaves own race sold them off.


I've already covered this poorly-thought argument in this thread something like three times. 21 pages, I guess I can't blame you if you didn't catch it. Thing is, "their own race" sold slaves because whites were buying. Basic economics there, you can't have trade in a product unless there's a demand for it. Whites - the Dutch, Portuguese, Spanish, and English - supplied both the demand for slaves, and the means to capture them. If we take them out of the picture, do you think the people of Africa would have been filling ships full of other Africans, and forcing whites in the new world to take them as slaves? Of course not.


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.


And the point is, that cannot be accomplished if there is an active effort to obfuscate and denigrate the history of people who do not fit the standards of the dominant caste in a society. The saying is, "the victors write the history books,"but that statement is also an admission that such a history is biased and incomplete, isn't it?


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.


Precisely. You learned about a moment of Native people helping out whites. Did you learn why? Did you learn about the next 20 years after the foundation of the Plymouth colony? Do the words "Pequot" or "Metacom" mean anything? Narraganset? Did you learn about the actual depth of cultural exchange, or was it just Tisquantum showing the English how to put an anchovy in the hole they planted the corn in? Any mention of how the Jamestown Settlers migrated to and joined the Croatoan people, or why? Does it teach you that the Seminole were a multiracial people where whites, Indians, blacks, and even a few Asians lived together as one unified people? Hell, did you even know there were Asians in Florida at that time? (Spanish-speaking Filipino settlers who homesteaded in Florida in the mid-1500's, if you're curious)

The history books teach a very shallow view of history, at least as it pertains to Indians, blacks, the Spanish, and Asians in the country. The picture is very incomplete, and much of what students could learn is intentionally omitted - It's certainly not for lack of space.


Like I said, what is done is done and honestly, like everything else, it was meant to be for some reason or another.


Perhaps. However, wounds can be healed. And of course, history is always growing, every day. Society is always changing, every day.


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.


Master of the understatement. The truth about Columbus is that he literally committed genocide in the Caribbean. Hispaniola had a population of about one and a half million Taino in 1491. By 1495, they were down to two hundred. All the Spanish records of the period describe slaughter and brutality heaped on those people. Today there are no Taino.


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.


I know. That's one reason to advocate a better standard of history. Return history to these kids. 'Course, the entire process of teaching history in school is terribly flawed for ALL students, but that could be the subject for a whole 'nother thread. Check out James Loewen's "Lies My Teacher Told Me" for a pretty in-depth look at that subject.



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 01:41 PM
link   
reply to post by jmknapp76
 


The past impacts the present and sets a stage for the future. It damn sure DOES matter.

We can walk and chew gum at the same time, you know; it's not hard to be concerned about war, poverty, abuse, et al, and still have concerns about history. In fact we can often look to history for answers to WHY those same situations exist.

Why is Haiti poor? Open a history book, it'll tell you.



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
Thing is, "their own race" sold slaves because whites were buying. Basic economics there, you can't have trade in a product unless there's a demand for it.


Not the whole truth. Whites were far from the sole or even main demand for African slaves. Asians bought, other Africans bought, Middle Easterners bought. Whites get abuse about slavery because they are less racist, not more. Go be an angry black man or woman in the middle east. Or Japan. Or China. Or another African country. Somewhere else that dealt in African slaves. No one will give a crap, and they might just kill or jail you. They arent apologists and they dont care if you are butt hurt about what happened to your ancestors.

Im not sure why there is this huge desire to lump all whites into one pot, ignore the facts about our multiculturalism, many histories, etc., and at the same time lump all blacks into one pot, and try to pretend that they are all the same, and ignore the obvious, that they are not, and that some of the absolute most demonic discrimination and genocide occurs between ethnic groups or nationalities that share the same skin color.

One day I am going to write a book, and it will be titled "The Power of Ow." And it will be an exploration of why people hold on to victimhood, how they benefit and gain power from their love affair with their suffering. It is really very convenient for them. It allows people to be amazingly cruel and self centered and violent without their ever having to examine or acknowledge their own nastiness. When you feel YOUR victim somehow deserves your hatred, you dont have to acknowledge that you are exactly the same as the people who harmed you, or your ancestors. You can cling to the delusion of righteousness.

But it doesnt alter the fact. If you are a racist, you are exactly the same as any other racist. You can claim no moral high ground because "it was done to me or mine." Why? Because more times than not, the people you victimize with your righteous indignation are innocents. You are just perpetuating the cycle.



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 02:39 PM
link   
Every month is white history month in the ghetto.If you walk the streets ,youll be history.



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 03:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox

Originally posted by FPB214
Well if that's what the history book looks like to him, than I feel sorry.


That's actually the way they're written.


They must have left out the part where the slaves own race sold them off.


I've already covered this poorly-thought argument in this thread something like three times. 21 pages, I guess I can't blame you if you didn't catch it. Thing is, "their own race" sold slaves because whites were buying. Basic economics there, you can't have trade in a product unless there's a demand for it. Whites - the Dutch, Portuguese, Spanish, and English - supplied both the demand for slaves, and the means to capture them. If we take them out of the picture, do you think the people of Africa would have been filling ships full of other Africans, and forcing whites in the new world to take them as slaves? Of course not.


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.


And the point is, that cannot be accomplished if there is an active effort to obfuscate and denigrate the history of people who do not fit the standards of the dominant caste in a society. The saying is, "the victors write the history books,"but that statement is also an admission that such a history is biased and incomplete, isn't it?


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.


Precisely. You learned about a moment of Native people helping out whites. Did you learn why? Did you learn about the next 20 years after the foundation of the Plymouth colony? Do the words "Pequot" or "Metacom" mean anything? Narraganset? Did you learn about the actual depth of cultural exchange, or was it just Tisquantum showing the English how to put an anchovy in the hole they planted the corn in? Any mention of how the Jamestown Settlers migrated to and joined the Croatoan people, or why? Does it teach you that the Seminole were a multiracial people where whites, Indians, blacks, and even a few Asians lived together as one unified people? Hell, did you even know there were Asians in Florida at that time? (Spanish-speaking Filipino settlers who homesteaded in Florida in the mid-1500's, if you're curious)

The history books teach a very shallow view of history, at least as it pertains to Indians, blacks, the Spanish, and Asians in the country. The picture is very incomplete, and much of what students could learn is intentionally omitted - It's certainly not for lack of space.


Like I said, what is done is done and honestly, like everything else, it was meant to be for some reason or another.


Perhaps. However, wounds can be healed. And of course, history is always growing, every day. Society is always changing, every day.


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.


Master of the understatement. The truth about Columbus is that he literally committed genocide in the Caribbean. Hispaniola had a population of about one and a half million Taino in 1491. By 1495, they were down to two hundred. All the Spanish records of the period describe slaughter and brutality heaped on those people. Today there are no Taino.


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.


I know. That's one reason to advocate a better standard of history. Return history to these kids. 'Course, the entire process of teaching history in school is terribly flawed for ALL students, but that could be the subject for a whole 'nother thread. Check out James Loewen's "Lies My Teacher Told Me" for a pretty in-depth look at that subject.


Whether it was whites buying, asians, or aliens, it really doesn't matter. Fact is, they sold them with no shame. They benefited from it. This is part of the human culture. Ancient tribes weren't all peaceful, they could be practically the same but for some reason or another decide to attack and go to war with one another.

Im sure all of the people did not die just from Columbus. He may have had alot to do with it, but im sure the blame can fall on more heads than just his.

Nobody is trying to denigrate any race. Do they go into depth of the subject you listed pertaining to the Pilgrims and Indians? No. They only get in depth with certain things that they think matters most, such as the holocaust/civil war/slavery and so on. If a young black would like to know more about his/her history on a number of topics, google awaits. They have to take the initiative like everyone else. I love WW2, yet in every class i've ever been in the only time we ever touched the subject was when we were discussing the holocaust. They don't go in depth. Most classes nowadays last about 2 hours, at least where im from in Florida. It's really not that much time. By the time they get the "most important" subjects out of the way, and all of the subjects that are relatively short in between, you realize that's about all the time you had throughout the year. I mean, from my past history classes, we go from the beginning to the end, from ancient time to now. Seems like enough time to not only cover but also get in depth with certain subjects, but it's not.

Some of the things you mentioned I actually did learn about, however we didn't spend weeks learning about it. By the time you got to one subject, it was time to move on to another. Wounds can be healed, and im happy to see alot of Indian businesses opening in MO and places like AR. Especially the big casinos. Though, its not like we can throw Indians all of this land back, considering its now taken and being developed. Sad, but true.

edit on 16-2-2011 by FPB214 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 03:43 PM
link   
There wont be one, cause where raised to be ashamed of what people before us did lol.

For me i celebrate each holiday i can lol, im irish, french, scotish, italian, Huron, brithish, german, and im sure i elft some out, so when ever theres a ce;ebration im there lol.

Dont let people tell you ya cant be proud lol, and it aint racist either, and im proud to have added some japanese for my kids, theres more days to celebrate right there



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 03:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by SilentKillah

Originally posted by FPB214

Originally posted by SilentKillah
It's called Country Music Television (CMT). Just because it doesn't hold the name "White" in it doesn't mean that it doesn't serve the same purpose. And lets not forget that MTV once was the EXACT opposite of BET. They both since gone separate ways in programming which I'm not supportive of.


CMT, in my opinion, is not like BET. BET shows anything and everything about the black culture. CMT is country. I never watch CMT, and never have and im white, I just don't like the country music. If it was about the white culture it would show more aspects than just country. As for MTV, when were they the exact opposite of BET? Ever since MTV has been around it has been about music in general, not a particular race. No race is left out on MTV today. That's why it poisons every race.

Also, back in school I learned about slavery throughout the year, not just in February. Whenever that time of American History would come around, such as the revolutionary/civil war slavery was a part of every aspect of it.
edit on 16-2-2011 by FPB214 because: (no reason given)


From what I've seen on CMT, it's the purely a "White" station. I can understand that you feel it's not the same as BET. But from an opposite perspective, I feel that it's pretty close to it. BET does exactly what you said today... yes, however in my younger years (17 or so years ago), I remember watching BET and pretty much it was solely black music videos all day. MTV was the exact opposite because all they showed were white music videos all day. And Bevis and Butthead of course. Nowdays, both BET and MTV are doing different things that I do like and I don't watch either of them anymore.

I am in NO way implying that MTV leaves a race out TODAY, but back in the past they did. MTV was a great station to me when they were doing a lot of the funny stuff like Next, and those dating shows. That's when I watched MTV the most.

When it comes to the schools, my school systems were different. I went to schools in Youngstown, OH, Orlando, FL, and PG County, MD, and the only time that black history was discussed was in the month of February. Maybe a few little statements about a black person, but it didn't ever discuss the significance on American History that it had.


Black people were featured on MTV since it aired in the 80's. Sure, there was more rock music then, because the media today was not the same back then. MTV was never strictly white people. As for CMT, its isn't a white station because it literally just covers country music. Now, you may think it's more of a white station because lets face it, how many black country stars do you see today? Either way, if there were many black country stars, who were famous, they would more than likely be on CMT. Like I said, BET covers everything about the black culture. There has never been a channel that has focused on nothing but white culture all around. Not just country music. I also went to school in Florida pretty much all my life, and every race was mentioned in some shape or form throughout the year, and when February came around it was almost strictly just history on the black culture, which is fine but mixing it in throughout the year would make it a little less of a racial thing, and into more of a human thing if you know what I mean. Not that it even bothers me because im fine with it, and if thats the only way to get kids today to learn of black history, than so be it. Sucks it has to be that way.
edit on 16-2-2011 by FPB214 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 04:53 PM
link   
reply to post by apodictic
 


I understand what you are saying. Unfortunately, there are a lot of things that people don't get based on their ignorance to what a term means.

When someone is "Black" in this country, we understand them to be "Black Americans". I am especially keen on this here in South Florida, where (lowercase b) black people are abundant, but not all of them are (uppercase B) Black - descendents of slaves. There are Haitians, Jamaicans, Bahamians, Afro-Cubans, Afro-Dominicans and Afro-Brazilians here in large numbers. None of these groups mutually identifies with the others, skin color being the obvious exception (as an opposition to majority light-skinned European, Mulatto and Mixed groups). It is further complicated because some of the lighter skinned Haitians may still identify with all Haitians, despite being more French than West African.

It's all very confusing, but my point remains. None of these groups would be considered Black down here, despite most of them being black - get it?

The Haitians don't see themselves as Black, of course they certainly see themselves as black. The Afro-Cubans associate more with Salsa music, Cuban sandwiches and cafe cubano than they do with hip-hop or gospel and soul food.

Interestingly, when the children born in this country to immigrants from these nations are growing up and acculturating, many (if not most) of them tend to identify with Black Americans, perhaps again because of the skin color opposition (gotta choose one group to belong to!). This affects speech, music, habits, dress and more.

So, returning to Black History Month. It's a stupid idea because the underlying fact is that if history were to be taught properly (which is a stretch when few subjects are taught properly in our school system), the Black American contributions to American society would not be singled out (segregated?) from the rest of the contributions by the European-descendent population. Rather, the history books would be focused on the period in question, with no need to re-order the information on any other basis than the chronology. All Americans (and people from other nations) who have contributed to the history of the country (and world) should be focused on in their appropriate context, not haphazardly grouped together for a perceived salient attribute (skin color).

**Many years ago, a girl in my college study abroad program in Spain is sitting at bus stop. She turns to another girl in the program. She says, "I didn't realize that, like, there were so many African-Americans in Spain" - referring to the Nigerian (and other) immigrants peddling copied CDs on the sidewalks. Sigh.



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 07:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by tom502
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.


100% Agreed. If we are supposed to be equal, then we should stop pointing out reasons why we are different. I have not, nor has my family taken part in any of the horrible events of the past, whether it was slavery or discrimination. Yes, it is quite important to recognize we made some horrible mistakes in the past because we don't want to do it again, but at this point it's like picking a scab over and over again and not letting it heal.



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 09:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by tom502
Honky don't count in the USA. That's the biased agenda of the powers that be. It's not racist to be against racism, which is what Black History Month is. It should be replaced with Heritage Month. Were all peoples of the various backgrounds can acknowledge them without being sepratist which is what singleing out one race(black) does. What about Yellow History Month, Red History Month, Brown History Month, it's all devisive. Do away with it completly or have Heritage Month, which is for everyone.


You are absolutely right. It's so obvious. But then again we live in the US ...



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 09:16 PM
link   
reply to post by ERSRHD
 


I would also like to add, that eliminating racism (if that's even possible) requires the cooperation of both parties. No one's life experience is identical, but I can tell you that I (a white male) have done everything I can thus far in my life to be indiscriminate and fair toward everyone of any race/color/background. In my opinion, that is all I need to do.

If you want my honest opinion about discrimination, I really don't think we'll ever see the same kind of racism we saw before MLK Jr's day. We've progressed far beyond that. Racism still exists, but it's not because we still see African-Americans as would-be slaves. I think racism exists today for very different reasons. I'll use my university campus as a backdrop for this argument:

On campus we have several exchange students from various nations, and many of those students are from Africa. We also have several African-American students, mostly from the surrounding cities. Here are some common observations about both the Africans, and the African-Americans.


African Exchange Students:
-(Not always, but usually) wearing a clean polo shirt tucked into jeans or khaki pants with a belt, tennis shoes or casual dress shoes.
-Very polite.
-Very friendly.
-Always on time for class.

African-American students:
-(Not always, but usually) wearing baggy jeans, boots (untied), sports jersey, etc.
-Males often make sexual remarks about females who pass by (I have witnessed this on various occasions)
-I once yelled at a guy for not looking where he was going and walking in front of my car, and a group of black males thought I was yelling at them, so they chased my car, yelling profanities and threats.

Now, I would be very glad to work with or hang out on my free time with one of the African exchange students. In fact, I made friends with one of them last year in an English class. We ate lunch together and worked together for a group project.

If I said then, that I felt comfortable around Africans but not around African-Americans, would that make me racist? They are both the same color, so color has nothing to do with my judgment (other than to make my observations). It has everything to do with my personal comfort.

I can apply the same idea to white people. I would feel more comfortable hanging around a clean, well-mannered white person than I would with some creepy barfly who gets drunk and hits on the bartenders.

My bottom line is that I think a lot of "racism" isn't about race at all- it's about the image that race has created for itself. If that's the case, there is nothing I can do about it.






top topics



 
78
<< 19  20  21    23  24 >>

log in

join