DECENCY, STATUES, AND GEORGE WASHINGTON – WHY TRUMP IS WRONG ABOUT THEM ALL

[leibowde84]

So I can't define what Asian culture is to me, but I need your agreement on this?

Not sure what you mean by this. Why would you need my agreement on anything? I am asking because I am curious as to whether asian culture actually exists. You, of course, are free to think whatever you want. But, I would assume that if you are adamant something exists, you would be able to explain what it is.

 

[leibowde84]

How can you call any American citizen "un-American"?

As if there's a distinction between "true Americans" and people too "vile, evil, despicable" to be considered members of the country they were born in.

You're as bad, if not worse than Trump, simply for making these points.

By unamerican, I don't mean they aren't american citizens. I mean that their actions and beliefs go against every single american value that our country prides itself on. They, of course, are legally/technically American citizens.

Why are you defending Nazis, anyways?

un-A·mer·i·can
ˌənəˈmerəkən/
adjective
adjective: unAmerican

1. not in accordance with American characteristics.
   "such un-American concepts as subsidized medicine"
   • UShistorical
     contrary to the interests of the US and therefore treasonable.

 

[leibowde84]

Stereotypes are like the smoke to the fire. Sure they are sometimes incorrect, but not almost always. That's why they exist in the first place.

Respect for elders might be a cross cultural thing, but it is expressed differently in Asian culture compared to say the West. For example in the West it is usually more polite to say Mr or Mrs when addressing an elder, or sir and ma'am, sometimes even referring to them by their first name is accepted as respectful. Asians on the other hand usually address their elders using familial terms, and in some Asian cultures using familial terms even if they're not actually related to you is seen as the norm. In "The West" something like that needs preamble. Example referring to or thinking of one of your dad's friends as your uncle/aunt, simply because you grew up around them. Some Asians on the other hand will call complete strangers aunty/uncle simply because they are older. Asians often see respecting one's elders as a matter of duty and honor, the West usually sees it as being polite or even an expression of love. Also I have seen far more Asians enforcing the no shoes in the house rule than "White people." And even then, it's usually because of their Asian spouse. (Or because they are very clean people!) Just an observation mind you.
As a mixed race Asian/whitey, I will gladly tell you that Asian culture is most definitely a thing, even though both share remarkable similarities. We even joke amongst ourselves that someone is "way too brown" or "way too white" based entirely on how much they follow one culture or the other.
But it's one of those things that you know sort of by default, but have a hard time expressing that to others who didn't grow up in that sort of thing. If that makes sense?

It's more in the details than anything else that separates "Asian culture" to "American culture" or white culture or whatever you wish to call it. But given that we live in a multicultural society, there's bound to be overlap anyway.

Disclaimer, I am kind of generalizing. This is in no way suppose to be indicative of every single Asian or "white" culture. Blah blah blah etc etc etc.

Thanks for your explanation. That was informative. But, just to be clear, my point was that white culture, black culture, asian culture, etc. don't actually exist because there are so many factions within them that make them too different.

 

[leibowde84]

I think you're quibbling over technicalities here. If they were wrong, then they were wrong. If they say today "it is wrong" while yesterday they said "it was right," then it's a contradiction which has to be addressed. It's because of these kinds of equivocations that we can't even seem to move forward as a country.

There are many things that were acceptable a hundred fifty years ago that aren't acceptable today. That is a fact. I understand that. But, treason was never acceptable, especially when that treason caused the death of 1.2 million americans.

Nobody is being let off the hook. For any crimes they committed, they will pay. Even Trump has said as much. But as a society, we still have to examine the reasons why. To examine the cause is the first step towards finding a solution. But if your only priority is to seek out and punish anyone you deem to be a racist, then nothing will really be solved in the long run.

You may be correct in that they're gullible, although gullibility, in and of itself, does not explain the hatred and anger which we're talking about. I've heard some white racists play the "victim card," claiming that they (or their family/loved ones) were victimized by blacks in some way or another.

I would say that stupidity explains a man judging all members of a race for the crimes of one. And, it was working pretty well until Trump was elected just ridiculing racists whenever they showed up anywhere. I think we need to get back to doing that.

 

[suncowiam]

Not sure what you mean by this. Why would you need my agreement on anything? I am asking because I am curious as to whether asian culture actually exists. You, of course, are free to think whatever you want. But, I would assume that if you are adamant something exists, you would be able to explain what it is.

I've already explained it to you. This is not a mathematical proof. You can choose not to accept it. I do not need to further expand on this. Culture is dynamic from region to region, from individual to individual. If you feel no need for an Asian culture than that's your right. In my area and within my experience there is definitely an Asian culture. All you can do is take or not take my word for it and it can end there.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

No. I'm saying that if a White person or White population wanted to define White Culture, then they should be able to without discrimination.

Why would I want them to speak for 'whites'?

 

[suncowiam]

Why would I want them to speak for 'whites'?

Australians have a culture, right? May I say Australian culture?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Australians have a culture, right? May I say Australian culture?

Sure. It's tough not to fall into misleading stereotypes, but you could make a few generalizations. It's quite different to Swedish culture, for example.

 

[suncowiam]

Sure. It's tough not to fall into misleading stereotypes, but you could make a few generalizations. It's quite different to Swedish culture, for example.

Right, but if one Australian rejected another Australian's definition of Australian culture, then what?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Right, but if one Australian rejected another Australian's definition of Australian culture, then what?

Then...fair enough. No-one would give a crap. That's part of Australian culture...

Heehee...

 

[suncowiam]

Then...fair enough. No-one would give a crap. That's part of Australian culture...

Heehee...

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Actually it strikes me that you deserve a more thought through response, although there is some truth in my first glib attempt.

Mostly, Australian culture comes down to a degree of assimilation with what came before, the ability to not take things too seriously (which can become apathy in a more negative sense), and a weird mix of respecting and challenging authority.

Anyone overthinking 'culture' is more likely to be seen as un-Australian than anything, but we have a latent hostility/racism towards people bringing external cultures to Australia and deliberately holding themselves separate.

Still, our 'culture' is such a loose thing it's hard to rally people behind some sort of protection of it. We have our nationalists and extreme lefties like anywhere, but they lack any sort of coherency, let alone consistency (imho).

Ultimately, Americans are more earnest than us (generalizing like heck, but that appears the overall truth).

 

[suncowiam]

Actually it strikes me that you deserve a more thought through response, although there is some truth in my first glib attempt.

Mostly, Australian culture comes down to a degree of assimilation with what came before, the ability to not take things too seriously (which can become apathy in a more negative sense), and a weird mix of respecting and challenging authority.

Anyone overthinking 'culture' is more likely to be seen as un-Australian than anything, but we have a latent hostility/racism towards people bringing external cultures to Australia and deliberately holding themselves separate.

Still, our 'culture' is such a loose thing it's hard to rally people behind some sort of protection of it. We have our nationalists and extreme lefties like anywhere, but they lack any sort of coherency, let alone consistency (imho).

Ultimately, Americans are more earnest than us (generalizing like heck, but that appears the overall truth).

Culture is a huge abstraction for the individual to define. It grows as more individuals sign up to the same definition.

My only point in all of this is why be offended if there was no intent of harm by those that want to define culture for themselves.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Culture is a huge abstraction for the individual to define. It grows as more individuals sign up to the same definition.

My only point in all of this is why be offended if there was no intent of harm by those that want to define culture for themselves.

Because they are using a tag that incorporates me, and which I thoroughly reject.

I'm a white, middle-aged affluent white man. Some might see me as the evil empire, and some might see me as some sort of true expression of humanity, but both views are ridiculous parodies.

If someone claimed that Australians are something I found inaccurate and distasteful, I'd push back. If someone claimed atheists are something I found inaccurate and distasteful, I'd push back.

Heck, I hope I'd push back when someone claimed something I found inaccurate and distasteful about theists, even though I have no 'skin in the game'.

Motherhood statements about diverse populations are incorrect by definition, so (in my opinion) can only be judged on utility.

 

[Faithofchristian]

The statues of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams.and others, are there as a reminder to us as the founding fathers of our country.

They were not in No way put there as a reminder of slavery. But a reminder to us of their fight for freedom, unto which we to day enjoy our freedom because of what they did to give us Freedom.

But can not put all the blame on them for having slaves in this country?

When in fact the Founding fathers were not the first to own slaves in this country.

The native Americans who were first here in this country, upon having a war with another tribe, would take those who they captured and make them their slaves.This was long before the white man came here to this country. That Natives Americans were already making slaves of each other.

So the white man was not the first to have slaves in this country.

The second people to have slaves in this country was a black man named Anthony Johnson back in 1600 - 70, This to was way before any of the founding fathers were born and way before this country became to be United States.To find out more on Anthony Johnson type in your search engine Anthony Johnson slave owner.

The white man was only the third party to have slaves in this country.

But for some reason the white man is look upon as being the only ones too have slaves. When in fact the white man was only doing what those were already doing in this country.

So maybe those who first had slaves should be look upon as the Guilty Ones.

And not the white man, who stands innocent of not being the first or the second, but only the third in line to have slaves in this country.

Having slaves in this country, were already being committed by those who are now trying to shift the blame over on the white man, When in fact their the absolute guilty Ones, of making slaves of their own People.

It's all there in History, who exactly was the first People to have Slaves and it sure was not the White man.

So lets put the blame where it's rightfully due and put things in it's rightful place.

1st Native Americans,
2nd African Americans,.
3rd White man American.

 

[Stevicus]

The statues of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams.and others, are there as a reminder to us as the founding fathers of our country.

They were not in No way put there as a reminder of slavery. But a reminder to us of their fight for freedom, unto which we to day enjoy our freedom because of what they did to give us Freedom.

But can not put all the blame on them for having slaves in this country?

When in fact the Founding fathers were not the first to own slaves in this country.

The native Americans who were first here in this country, upon having a war with another tribe, would take those who they captured and make them their slaves.This was long before the white man came here to this country. That Natives Americans were already making slaves of each other.

So the white man was not the first to have slaves in this country.

The second people to have slaves in this country was a black man named Anthony Johnson back in 1600 - 70, This to was way before any of the founding fathers were born and way before this country became to be United States.To find out more on Anthony Johnson type in your search engine Anthony Johnson slave owner.

The white man was only the third party to have slaves in this country.

But for some reason the white man is look upon as being the only ones too have slaves. When in fact the white man was only doing what those were already doing in this country.

So maybe those who first had slaves should be look upon as the Guilty Ones.

And not the white man, who stands innocent of not being the first or the second, but only the third in line to have slaves in this country.

Having slaves in this country, were already being committed by those who are now trying to shift the blame over on the white man, When in fact their the absolute guilty Ones, of making slaves of their own People.

It's all there in History, who exactly was the first People to have Slaves and it sure was not the White man.

So lets put the blame where it's rightfully due and put things in it's rightful place.

1st Native Americans,
2nd African Americans,.
3rd White man American.

When slavery was first introduced in the colonies, it wasn't race-based nor was it a life-long or inherited situation. It was more like indentured servitude and it was for a limited period of time. It transformed into what it later became in the latter half of the 17th century, possibly triggered by Bacon's Rebellion. Poor farmers, both black and white, had a shared grudge against the elite back then, and ended up fighting side by side against the wealthy. Although the rebellion was put down, the outcome eventually led to slavery becoming race-based and far worse than when it actually began. The elite had a shared interest in not wanting poor blacks and poor whites to cooperate or band together, so racism was invented for that very reason.

This doesn't get anyone off the hook, at least as far as "blame" goes. However, I think it's erroneous to blame "whites" as an entire group, since that pretty much feeds into the same idea which keeps people apart and different groups divided. If any group should be blamed, it should be capitalists, regardless of their race, creed, color, gender, or sexual orientation.

 

[Revoltingest]

If any group should be blamed, it should be capitalists.....

How about blaming only those people who actually enslaved other people?
This makes more sense than attacking modern groups of people who weren't even around back then.

 

[columbus]

If any group should be blamed, it should be capitalists, regardless of their race, creed, color, gender, or sexual orientation.

Not really. Slavery didn't have anything to do with capitalism. It was based on the old aristocratic privilege world view. Some people were entitled to service and others forced to do the servicing.

That didn't stop the slaveholders from appealing to capitalist ideas when it suited. They complained that Emancipation was "being deprived of property without due process". Sorta like the racists inventing "social darwinism".
Tom

 

[Faithofchristian]

When slavery was first introduced in the colonies, it wasn't race-based nor was it a life-long or inherited situation. It was more like indentured servitude and it was for a limited period of time. It transformed into what it later became in the latter half of the 17th century, possibly triggered by Bacon's Rebellion. Poor farmers, both black and white, had a shared grudge against the elite back then, and ended up fighting side by side against the wealthy. Although the rebellion was put down, the outcome eventually led to slavery becoming race-based and far worse than when it actually began. The elite had a shared interest in not wanting poor blacks and poor whites to cooperate or band together, so racism was invented for that very reason.

This doesn't get anyone off the hook, at least as far as "blame" goes. However, I think it's erroneous to blame "whites" as an entire group, since that pretty much feeds into the same idea which keeps people apart and different groups divided. If any group should be blamed, it should be capitalists, regardless of their race, creed, color, gender, or sexual orientation.

No matter how you try to cut it, it still comes out the first to have slaves, were the native Americans and then second was a black man named Anthony Johnson in 1600 - 70,
Then the third was white.
I said nothing about Racism or Race.
What it has to do with, who was the first in this country to have Slavery.

All I was pointing out was don't put the whites as the corporates for Slavery as people are trying to doing.

Whites were not the first, Slavery was already being committed, before whites had any slaves in this country..

 

[Stevicus]

How about blaming only those people who actually enslaved other people?
This makes more sense than attacking modern groups of people who weren't even around back then.

Yes, this would make sense. I was only addressing the earlier poster's contention about which racial/ethnic group should be "blamed," while I was pointing out that it might be better to blame those who embrace certain political beliefs or engage in certain kinds of behaviors.