Trump's Culture War Targets America's Museums

Bradskii · Friday at 6:54 PM

Hans Blaster said:
The whole bullet point from the WH includes the "Texas Revolution":

The National Museum of the American Latino characterizes the Texas Revolution as a “massive defense of slavery waged by ‘white Anglo Saxon’ settlers against anti-slavery Mexicans fighting for freedom, not a Texan war of independence from Mexico,” and frames the Mexican-American War as “the North American invasion” that was “unprovoked and motivated by pro-slavery politicians.”

Who does the WH think settled Texas from outside and why? It was slave drivers and others from the old SW (Miss, Ala, Tenn). It wasn't the Germans. German colonies started *after* Texas "independence".

But..but...Remember the Alamo and The Duke fighting off those dastardly Mexicans.

BCP1928 · Friday at 7:06 PM

SavedByGrace3 said:
I think this is a simplistic, if not racist, view. We don't need to change history or mutate our culture into something it is not, especially on the taxpayer's dime. I do not want my taxes going into an institution that warps reality and portrays me as something evil. It is not fair, and it is not true. Hate is wrong in any context.

How does it portray you as something evil? Do you still own slaves?

ThatRobGuy · Friday at 7:06 PM

durangodawood said:
Making it legal that people could be property, and having that as the main economic basis for a whole region, and fighting a huge horrible war to maintain that setup really is another level. And then how such vicious racism persisted for so long afterward.

The whole matter (including the long grinding fight for justice) truly was defining for the character of our country in a way that these other "various forms" generally arent for other countries.

In your honest opinion, if Westernized/Euro culture hadn't been become the global powerhouse... would the slavery situation have been better/worse/same today?

Based on the fact that they're still practicing it in several regions of the world... I'm not confident that they would have come to the "this is bad, we should outlaw and stigmatize it" conclusion on their own.

We both know the real answer to that question... So why is there an insistence on fixating on only one culture's complicity in the process?

BCP1928 · Friday at 7:34 PM

ThatRobGuy said:
This is one of those unfortunately casualties of a culture war.

Under normal circumstances (I'll call "normal" 2013 and before because that was the last time I remember things being somewhat normal)

People didn't seem to have many objections to hearing about bads with the goods in terms of our history.

Because they weren't hearing about the bad things. You were still being fed the toxic myth of American Exceptionalism.

ThatRobGuy said:
However, when there's a concerted effort to spend 10 years throwing the bads in everyone's faces across a multitude of mediums and injecting it into every discourse and dialog...people will eventually have some backlash against things they would have otherwise not minded.

Withdrawal can be hard.

ThatRobGuy said:
Or to put it in more lay terms, there are some people who will have the reaction of:
"Y'know, my kids get to hear about how terrible Westernized white people are on TV shows, movies, music, commentary shows, social media, I'd like to be able to take my kids somewhere to learn about the good things about the country and the history"

...and the real irony in all this?, is that the conversations that are presented as "we need to have a honest no holds barred, no-nonsense conversation about slavery and its impact" often exclusively fixates on the historical sins of the one and only culture (Westernized/Euro) that doesn't still actively practice it.

As members of "Westernized/Euro" culture we were the last to keep practicing it, and it took a bloody war to put an end to it. But we did put an end to it, and showing that it was a bad thing gives credit to our effort.

ThatRobGuy said:
Various forms of slavery (sex slavery, forced labor) still exist for 50 million people across ~150 different countries (in South America, Africa, Asia, the Middle East, and Eastern Europe)

Is that why the President objected to the presentation of slavery "as if it was a bad thing?"

BCP1928 · Friday at 7:40 PM

ThatRobGuy said:
In your honest opinion, if Westernized/Euro culture hadn't been become the global powerhouse... would the slavery situation have been better/worse/same today?

It was, I believe, the British who spearheaded the effort to end it.

ThatRobGuy said:
Based on the fact that they're still practicing it in several regions of the world... I'm not confident that they would have come to the "this is bad, we should outlaw and stigmatize it" conclusion on their own.

We both know the real answer to that question... So why is there an insistence on fixating on only one culture's complicity in the process?

Because it was, as a result of historical circumstance, white American culture that was complicit in it.

Hans Blaster · Friday at 7:58 PM

ThatRobGuy said:
In your honest opinion, if Westernized/Euro culture hadn't been become the global powerhouse... would the slavery situation have been better/worse/same today?

Based on the fact that they're still practicing it in several regions of the world... I'm not confident that they would have come to the "this is bad, we should outlaw and stigmatize it" conclusion on their own.

We both know the real answer to that question... So why is there an insistence on fixating on only one culture's complicity in the process?

As I recall, much of the worst and most extensive use of slavery throughout the last 500 years was under the watch and encouragement of those western global powerhouses.

BCP1928 · Friday at 8:04 PM

Hans Blaster said:
As I recall, much of the worst and most extensive use of slavery throughout the last 500 years was under the watch and encouragement of those western global powerhouses.

Sugar. Sugar was essential to the industrial revolution, empty calories to keep mill workers going.

Desk trauma · Friday at 8:25 PM

Bradskii said:
But..but...Remember the Alamo and The Duke fighting off those dastardly Mexicans.

Ozzy did nothing wrong.

SavedByGrace3 · Friday at 8:59 PM

BCP1928 said:
How does it portray you as something evil? Do you still own slaves?

Exactly. I do not and never have.

BCP1928 · Friday at 9:25 PM

SavedByGrace3 said:
Exactly. I do not and never have.

Then how does it portray you as something evil?

ThatRobGuy · Friday at 9:53 PM

BCP1928 said:
It was, I believe, the British who spearheaded the effort to end it.

They did a "phased approach" that didn't immediately emancipate everyone

But that aside, the Brits would be considered "Westernized/Euro" culture, would they not?

ThatRobGuy · Friday at 10:14 PM

Hans Blaster said:
As I recall, much of the worst and most extensive use of slavery throughout the last 500 years was under the watch and encouragement of those western global powerhouses.

Between 1526 and 1867, about 12.5 million Africans were shipped out of Africa in the transatlantic slave trade, with over 10.7 million delivered alive to the Americas. Most enslaved Africans went to the Caribbean and South America; only around 6% went directly to British North America (what became the U.S.).

The US wasn't even a country for most of that period.

And as far as the "colonial influence" in the areas of the "majority participants", that would be the Spanish and Portuguese. But we're not going to browbeat the descendants of the Spanish people are we...for reasons.

The objections a lot of people have to the nature of the discussion isn't the fact that slavery is evil, or is a shameful part of US history.

The objections stem from the notion that it's something "uniquely American".

When, in fact, it was an unfortunate "global norm", and one that we actually participated less in than other empires. Yet, it gets portrayed as being some sort of "enlightened" position to rip on America for it.

The Brits and us spearheaded ending that evil global norm.

And while the Brits started the process to eliminate it about 20 years earlier, they took a more "don't ruffle any feathers" approach (they did a phased rollout, paid direct compensation to the slave owners, and exempted the East India Company)... we fought one of the bloodiest battles in history to put an end to it.

Yet, in all of the contemporary conversations about the subject, the USA is singled out as if they're the sole "bad guys" in the whole affair.

That's what people object to (and thereby, try to overcorrect for)

If the whole class is complicit in stealing the answer sheet from the teacher's desk to cheat on a test, and one student gets a guilty conscience and fesses up and tries to make it right, it's quite frankly not fair to hyper-fixate on that one student's role in the initial "sin".

BCP1928 · Friday at 10:45 PM

ThatRobGuy said:
Yet, in all of the contemporary conversations about the subject, the USA is singled out as if they're the sole "bad guys" in the whole affair.

That's what people object to (and thereby, try to overcorrect for)

But it is entirely appropriate when the subject is slavery in the USA. Nobody else made us buy the slaves, nobody else made us exploit them, nobody else made us treat them badly after they were free. If you want to blame another country, you have to blame them for their own slaves, not ours.

Hans Blaster · Saturday at 12:46 AM

You've responded to the wrong claim again, Rob.

ThatRobGuy said:
Between 1526 and 1867, about 12.5 million Africans were shipped out of Africa in the transatlantic slave trade, with over 10.7 million delivered alive to the Americas. Most enslaved Africans went to the Caribbean and South America; only around 6% went directly to British North America (what became the U.S.).

The US wasn't even a country for most of that period.

So what? The claim of yours I was addressing was about "Westernized/Euro culture". The British colonies were certainly part of that "Westernized/Euro culture".

ThatRobGuy said:
And as far as the "colonial influence" in the areas of the "majority participants", that would be the Spanish and Portuguese. But we're not going to browbeat the descendants of the Spanish people are we...for reasons.

And they too were part of the "Westernized/Euro culture". (I'm not browbeating "descendants, I'm browbeating "Westernized/Euro culture" (and you.))

ThatRobGuy said:
The objections a lot of people have to the nature of the discussion isn't the fact that slavery is evil, or is a shameful part of US history.

The objections stem from the notion that it's something "uniquely American".

When, in fact, it was an unfortunate "global norm", and one that we actually participated less in than other empires. Yet, it gets portrayed as being some sort of "enlightened" position to rip on America for it.

Don't be so US centric. It's not the only part of "Westernized/Euro culture".

ThatRobGuy said:
The Brits and us spearheaded ending that evil global norm.

And while the Brits started the process to eliminate it about 20 years earlier, they took a more "don't ruffle any feathers" approach (they did a phased rollout, paid direct compensation to the slave owners, and exempted the East India Company)... we fought one of the bloodiest battles in history to put an end to it.

Make Georgia howl Again.

ThatRobGuy said:
Yet, in all of the contemporary conversations about the subject, the USA is singled out as if they're the sole "bad guys" in the whole affair.

Did you post this apologetic to defend against the wrong post?

Last 500 years of "defense" = "Columbus" onward of "Westernized/Euro culture". You've mentioned the African slave trade, but there is more subjugation and exploitation by "Westernized/Euro culture". There is the conquests and exploitation of the African interior, the north African coast, the middle east, south Asia, east Asia, Pacific islands, North America, Australia, and the mere existence of Ohio.

ThatRobGuy said:
That's what people object to (and thereby, try to overcorrect for)

If the whole class is complicit in stealing the answer sheet from the teacher's desk to cheat on a test, and one student gets a guilty conscience and fesses up and tries to make it right, it's quite frankly not fair to hyper-fixate on that one student's role in the initial "sin".

You seem awfully defensive.

ThatRobGuy · Saturday at 7:21 AM

BCP1928 said:
But it is entirely appropriate when the subject is slavery in the USA. Nobody else made us buy the slaves, nobody else made us exploit them, nobody else made us treat them badly after they were free. If you want to blame another country, you have to blame them for their own slaves, not ours.

But why, in terms of the conversation about slavery, is the conversation always centered around "Slavery in the USA".

If the nature of the conversations about "drinking problems" were always centered around "Doug's drinking problem", and whenever Doug said "but wait a minute, I actually stopped drinking years ago, and there were people who drank way more than I did, and some of them still do", it was met with a chastising "no no Doug...this is about YOUR drinking problem, that's where we need to keep the focus"

...it would be quite understandable that Doug would get a bit of a chip on his shoulder, and dare I say, become very receptive to 'manipulation through flattery' in the form of someone coming along (perhaps with ulterior motives) saying "From now on, we're going to stop talking about all that drinking problem stuff, and we're going to focus on some of the good things Doug has done throughout the years"

ThatRobGuy · Saturday at 8:29 AM

Hans Blaster said:
So what? The claim of yours I was addressing was about "Westernized/Euro culture". The British colonies were certainly part of that "Westernized/Euro culture".

Yes, during the period when they ended it... when they were still fully engaging in it heavily was

Hans Blaster said:
So what? The claim of yours I was addressing was about "Westernized/Euro culture". The British colonies were certainly part of that "Westernized/Euro culture".

As noted, only 6% of the slaves ended up in British-controlled territories. The majority of Central and South America weren't under direct British influence for most of the time.

Hans Blaster said:
And they too were part of the "Westernized/Euro culture". (I'm not browbeating "descendants, I'm browbeating "Westernized/Euro culture" (and you.))

If you're referring to Spanish empire that existed as the dominant force during the majority of the period in question, they were not.

Westernized, as defined by:

Democracy and political pluralism
Rational and scientific thinking
Individualism and emphasis on personal freedom
Capitalist economic systems and free markets

...would not describe what the Spanish empire was during that time. They were a Catholic Monarchy that was still more influenced by medieval values than they were modern Western values.

Hans Blaster said:
Don't be so US centric.

If people don't want a US-centric response, then they shouldn't be making critique that's US-centric.

Hans Blaster said:
You seem awfully defensive.

Well, when half of the population feels compelled to think it makes them "progressive"/"edgy"/"enlightened" by crapping all over country and hyper-fixate on sins of the past in effort to guilt people into getting on board with their agendas of the present, it's only fair.

durangodawood · Saturday at 10:28 AM

ThatRobGuy said:
In your honest opinion, if Westernized/Euro culture hadn't been become the global powerhouse... would the slavery situation have been better/worse/same today?

Based on the fact that they're still practicing it in several regions of the world... I'm not confident that they would have come to the "this is bad, we should outlaw and stigmatize it" conclusion on their own.

We both know the real answer to that question... So why is there an insistence on fixating on only one culture's complicity in the process?

Because this is mainly about American history and culture, how we came to be in the state we are in.

Perhaps youre right about "Western" Euro moral heritage. Too bad the USA took so incredibly and brutally long to adopt it.

BCP1928 · Saturday at 2:55 PM

ThatRobGuy said:
Yes, during the period when they ended it... when they were still fully engaging in it heavily was

View attachment 368962

As noted, only 6% of the slaves ended up in British-controlled territories. The majority of Central and South America weren't under direct British influence for most of the time.

If you're referring to Spanish empire that existed as the dominant force during the majority of the period in question, they were not.

Westernized, as defined by:

Democracy and political pluralism

Rational and scientific thinking

Individualism and emphasis on personal freedom

Capitalist economic systems and free markets

...would not describe what the Spanish empire was during that time. They were a Catholic Monarchy that was still more influenced by medieval values than they were modern Western values.

OK, so what you appear to be talking about is not "Western/Euro" values, but what I think is often called "Ango-Protestant Exceptionalism"

ThatRobGuy said:
If people don't want a US-centric response, then they shouldn't be making critique that's US-centric.

Well, when half of the population feels compelled to think it makes them "progressive"/"edgy"/"enlightened" by crapping all over country and hyper-fixate on sins of the past in effort to guilt people into getting on board with their agendas of the present, it's only fair.

Making members of a subculture uncomfortable with a history display is all that is happening here. It is not "crapping on America."

Hans Blaster · Saturday at 7:10 PM

ThatRobGuy said:
Yes, during the period when they ended it... when they were still fully engaging in it heavily was

How did that sentence end? The only logical ending I can think of "also definitely part of Western culture".

ThatRobGuy said:
View attachment 368962

As noted, only 6% of the slaves ended up in British-controlled territories.

I haven't even mentioned the British imperialists, nor did you in the post I initially responded to (#83). You wrote of "Westernized/Euro culture" which certainly *includes* the islanders, but they are not the only slavers inside "Westernized/Euro culture", not by a country mile.

ThatRobGuy said:
The majority of Central and South America weren't under direct British influence for most of the time.

If you're referring to Spanish empire that existed as the dominant force during the majority of the period in question, they were not.

Not "Westernized/Euro culture"? LOL. Spain was brought into

ThatRobGuy said:
Westernized, as defined by:

Democracy and political pluralism

Rational and scientific thinking

Individualism and emphasis on personal freedom

Capitalist economic systems and free markets

...would not describe what the Spanish empire was during that time. They were a Catholic Monarchy that was still more influenced by medieval values than they were modern Western values.

Medieval is the name of a period of Western history, roughly 500-1500. Your bulleted lists of characteristics is very odd and it barely applies even now. Iberia and Gaul have been in the "Western world" for 2000 years. Catholicism is a Western religion. Your list is of things that flourished and developed into their modern forms in Western society, but they do not define it.

ThatRobGuy said:
If people don't want a US-centric response, then they shouldn't be making critique that's US-centric.

There was nothing in my response or even your post (#83) about the US.

ThatRobGuy said:
Well, when half of the population feels compelled to think it makes them "progressive"/"edgy"/"enlightened" by crapping all over country and hyper-fixate on sins of the past in effort to guilt people into getting on board with their agendas of the present, it's only fair.

Huh? You were tying "Westernized/Euro culture" to the ending of slavery, but from the actual evidence we can see so-called "Westernized/Euro culture" was the perpetrator of the last great wave of enslavement.

ThatRobGuy · Saturday at 7:18 PM

durangodawood said:
Because this is mainly about American history and culture, how we came to be in the state we are in.

Perhaps youre right about "Western" Euro moral heritage. Too bad the USA took so incredibly and brutally long to adopt it.

Right, but what I'm saying is that (even internationally) any conversation about slavery is almost exclusively US centric.

If domestic and international public discourse about the subject were proportional to the level of complicity in the offense, and people in the US still took the same position of "we don't want you talking about our involvement", then these accusations about people "wanting to erase history" would be perfectly valid.

Perhaps a better way of wording it.

It's not so much that people in the US want to ignore history as a general principle.

It's more like them not wanting to be the only one who doesn't have their negative history glossed over...and furthermore, not wanting to have that negative history used to define what the nation is all about.

If me and five other people all did something really bad and stupid like robbing a bank, and people wanted to talk about what all six of us did and our level of involvement... that's completely reasonable.

However, if whenever the bank robbery subject comes up, the only name brought up is mine, and nobody ever talks about the other five guys, and when people did talk about it, they portrayed it as if my entire existence is based on bank robbery --- yeah, I'm going to have some objections to that.

Trump's Culture War Targets America's Museums

Old age should burn and rave at close of day;

Well-Known Member

Part of the IT crowd

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Raised by bees

Well-Known Member

The pickles are up to something

Jesus is Lord of ALL! (Not asking permission)

Well-Known Member

Part of the IT crowd

Part of the IT crowd

Well-Known Member

Raised by bees

Part of the IT crowd

Part of the IT crowd

re Member

Well-Known Member

Raised by bees

Part of the IT crowd

Similar threads