America on Fire

[Dan]

Times like these tend to make all sorts of creatures come out from under their rocks.

While stupid folks on the fringe of left is fully capable of as much idiocy as on the right, I strongly disagree with simple equivalency between the two.

We are here due to the failure to curb the violent excesses of systemic racism in USA. The left is not the villain this time around.

It wasn't always true, but presently "left" is represented by Democrats and "right" is represented by Republicans. You have some exceptions, my governor for instance, but generally elected officials of the two parties represent a party platform. Local policing is overseen by the state and city governments.

Who has been in control of the city governments in most places where police brutality has been an issue?

We both know the answer, so I don't think it's safe, fair, or accurate to say that the left can be absolved. Ultimately, this shouldn't be a left/right issue. It shouldn't boil down to political confessions. It's a question of ethics. We can easily pin point it. We can see it. Therefore, it really shouldn't be hard (and the fact that it IS difficult has indeed largely been a facet of the right) to acknowledge this and find policy solutions.

What I am getting at is that the left is presently off its rocker. Normally, I wouldn't care about this. However, I really want to defeat Donald Trump. I have valid concerns with the direction of the current zeitgeist and how it will be interpreted by Americans other than true believers. So far, they have managed to damage Donald Trump's credibility and most Americans believe he has done a crap job of managing it.

The longer this goes on, the more outlandish, zealous viewpoints get put out there as part of mainstream consumption, however, WILL lead to a backlash. There will be unintended consequences. The left needs to reel in its fringe. Right now, it feels powerless to stop them. They're drunk on power.

I mean, really? Defund the police? What an albatross that is. The language is clearly at odds with a winning formula the left has found for other issues (e.g. pro-choice, marriage equality). There needs to be a serious rebranding and a serious discussion within the left as to how to package in a way that is palatable for Americans.

 

[R Cameron]

There's a real issue here: the reality that black Americans are policed differently, that this has a body count, that we've never given proper redress for slavery, that there's a prison industrial complex in this country, that the wealth gap between white and black Americans is so absurd as to create two different Americas... It's just being muddled by the lunatic fringe currently speaking for everyone.

I haven't kept a score, but that post is probably the first of your longer posts that I have had no disagreement with Especially that last paragraph, strong agreement there, and it's refreshing to hear a conservative say it so unequivocally.

 

[Dan]

I haven't kept a score, but that post is probably the first of your longer posts that I have had no disagreement with Especially that last paragraph, strong agreement there, and it's refreshing to hear a conservative say it so unequivocally.

I hesitate to accept the mantle of conservative. I'm a socialist. I happen to hold some views that are well aligned with modern, American conservatism (support for the death penalty, firearm ownership). I also happen to be part of a community they regularly vilify.

I decide every issue based on its own merit.

 

[Dan]

In somewhat (but not really) surprising news, Bernie Sanders appears to be the lone voice on the left who is unafraid to veer from the platform of obeisance to the albatross that is "defund the police."

Sanders Dismisses Progressive Calls to Defund Police, Says Departments Need More Resources

Senator Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.) broke from progressive counterparts in calls to defund the police, saying instead that the country needs “well-trained, well-educated, and well-paid professionals in police departments.”Sanders addressed progressive critics who viewed him as an obstacle to...

news.yahoo.com

From the article, “Too often around this country right now, you have police officers who take the job at very low payment, don’t have much education, don’t have much training,” he said.

“I want to change that,” he continued. “I also called for the transformation of police departments into — understanding that many police departments and cops deal every day with issues of mental illness, deal with issues of addiction, and all kinds of issues which should be dealt with by mental-health professionals or others, and not just by police officers.”

Indeed. Right now we are dealing a vilification of police departments when, in reality, they're US. This will be a nonstarter for a wide swath of the population. Sanders knows this. He warned them last time that they were ignoring working class, white males at their peril. We ended up with president Trump.

I think he sees the same pattern emerging. I also think that he wants to raise all boats, and that we have unlimited resources to do so. Not sure that's possible, but at least he's offering an alternative view.

 

[Nimbus]

It wasn't always true, but presently "left" is represented by Democrats and "right" is represented by Republicans. You have some exceptions, my governor for instance, but generally elected officials of the two parties represent a party platform. Local policing is overseen by the state and city governments.

Who has been in control of the city governments in most places where police brutality has been an issue?

We both know the answer, so I don't think it's safe, fair, or accurate to say that the left can be absolved. Ultimately, this shouldn't be a left/right issue. It shouldn't boil down to political confessions. It's a question of ethics. We can easily pin point it. We can see it. Therefore, it really shouldn't be hard (and the fact that it IS difficult has indeed largely been a facet of the right) to acknowledge this and find policy solutions.

What I am getting at is that the left is presently off its rocker. Normally, I wouldn't care about this. However, I really want to defeat Donald Trump. I have valid concerns with the direction of the current zeitgeist and how it will be interpreted by Americans other than true believers. So far, they have managed to damage Donald Trump's credibility and most Americans believe he has done a crap job of managing it.

The longer this goes on, the more outlandish, zealous viewpoints get put out there as part of mainstream consumption, however, WILL lead to a backlash. There will be unintended consequences. The left needs to reel in its fringe. Right now, it feels powerless to stop them. They're drunk on power.

I mean, really? Defund the police? What an albatross that is. The language is clearly at odds with a winning formula the left has found for other issues (e.g. pro-choice, marriage equality). There needs to be a serious rebranding and a serious discussion within the left as to how to package in a way that is palatable for Americans.

The crackpots who call for defunding the police is far from mainstream left, but the big crackpot in the white house represents the mainstream right. The choice for me is easy.

 

[Dan]

The crackpots who call for defunding the police is far from mainstream left, but the big crackpot in the white house represents the mainstream right. The choice for me is easy.

We're about to see about that.

No argument from me about Donald Trump being a big crackpot, among other things. The Republicans closed ranks around him, and they deserve to reap the whirlwind.

 

[fastpitch17]

Changes need to take place in classrooms across the US. Textbooks need to have their white washing of history removed and actual facts put in them. Children learn that yes, there was slavery. They learn of some of the people involved. Unfortunantly, there is a lot of information regarding it missing. George Washington cut down a cherry tree and admitted his guilt. Perhaps he had a family slave cut it down for him. With that cherry tree laying there, who cleaned it up? Thing is, many early American heros had slaves. This should be told. It doesn't lesson their efforts of designing and forming a new nation. It does complete the record of the person.

Too much of history taught in the US gets white washed. Of course, some Southern US textbooks have the Confederacy winning the Civil War.

 

[fastpitch17]

I remember my first encounter with racism. I grew up in a city where the only blacks were one family with a boy and girl offspring. The father and mother were both teachers at the University of Dubuque. I knew the son. There was no difference between him and any other guy except for the color of his skin. He didn't act different than anyone else.

When I entered the military reality opened up. Boot camp was a mix of races. White, Black, Latino. No one was treated different than anyone else but I contribute that to the fact our TI was Black. Heard stories later about TIs that were white. Tech Schools not much different but it was predominantly white. I gave that no thought. It was the way it was.

After all that I was assigned to a clinic at Kelly AFB, in San Antonio, TX. All seemed well. After 6 months I get an assignment to work with a team from what was then calked GEEIA. This a a communications construction organization. They worked in the field most times away from others. They got a medic because while they never had many visits to clinics, they were constantly having small to large injuries. These guys were the type that if they broke a bone they would just wrap it and move on. Evidently the AF thought that this particular group was going to need someone in place. Their assignment was to head to Cape Canaveral and install an antenna system to communicate with astronaults. 2 towers, 220 feet high and then the antenna built between them with a grounding field bigger than 4 football fields. 10 individuals and myself. Completed in 3 months.

It was our trip to the sight where I had my first encounter with racism. We stopped for breakfast in Mobile, Alabama. There were 7 whites and 4 blacks in the group. We all entered the Restaurant and moved some tables and sat down. A waitress came over and gave out menus. She came back to take the orders. She asked each of the white guys for their order and then walked away. 3 of our black members were from the NY area and one outside Chicago. Everyone was asking each other if they ordered. All the blacks said she didn't even address them. None of us were from the South so we thought it strange. We called the waitress back over and told her politely that she missed a few orders. Calmly she informed us that they don't serve blacks and they would need to find another eating place more suitable for their kind.

I had never experienced anything like that before. The other thing I experienced was our team leader, a tech sargent who immediately rose up out of his seat and told the waitress that all of his team will be served. Not all or no one, just all. She refused. The leader asked for the owner, not there. He asked for the manager who happened to be on his way to the table because it was starting to get loud. The manager asked softly what seemed to be the problem? Our leader then explained that all would be eating breakfast here. Manager said it was their policy to refuse service to niggers. Well, that got the team leader riled. He went face to face with the manager, explained loudly that everyone at these tables are over 6 feet tall, over 200 pounds, and can individually lift telephone poles. They are hot, tired if traveling and now on edge. He suggested that if they were not all served immediately, he would not be responsible for any of their actions. Manager asked, meaning what? Leader explains that if something should happen to his restaurant and it gets destroyed, he may have a hard time getting any cash out of the AF to fix it being it was caused by discrimination. That and the fact there are more white guys than blacks who will gladly be right up front. Something to that effect.

All were then served. Some other white customers got up and left. Others refused to come in after seeing blacks sitting there. The entire incident, the black member said nothing. The whites on the team came to their defense. It was that morning that I leaned 2 things. I leaned what racism looked like and I learned that I dislike grits totally.

A little about GEEIA teams. No one challenged them. I remember one incident where they worked to get something completed and in doing so they were late for chow and the chow hall was closed. Banging on doors only got a response that they were closed. Ah, a phone call to the base commander and only needing to tell him the GEEIA team was being refused meals because they were too late had the chow hall open in minutes with the staff treating us like royalty. Instead if a chow line like normal, they started taking orders and the NCO was constantly apologising and telling our team leader that if we are ever late, just call him and he will stay open. That happened a number if times.

These guys disregarded safety almost completely. They would only wear their safety belts for high work and most times would pull them up by rope if they were on towers. Belts got in the way of climbing. Safety hats were only for those on the ground and from what I seen dropped that was a priority. Unwritten rule was, if someone falls, make sure they have a safety belt around them and a hard hat next to their head. Then see if they are still alive. The would get cuts treated if there may be a chance of bleeding to death or the work day was ending. Breaks if they couldn't work but first they tried. One had a backhoe bucket come down on the side of his ankle. Buried his foot at least 8 inches into the ground. We dug it out and he was, all good. Once I got his boot off, wasn't all good by the swelling. Got it iced and sent him off for x rays. All wrapped up, he was back to work the next day. All if them were like that. None if them would tolarate and of their team members being singled out by anyone. No matter the reason. They had to rely on each other. If someone should step out of line, they shouldn't be surprised if a 2 pound hammer lands very near them from over 200 feet above. Reminders are harsh but effective.

Needless to say I had experienced many incidences of racism after that. Many if the forms of just segrigation of the military personnel. It hasn't gotten any better. I think worse.

 

[centurion]

I'd been avoiding this part of the thread because it's wildly off topic. As a rule of thumb, I try to avoid drawn out discussions on my two favorite topics here. However, in the interest of an alternative view of the life of Muhammad and as a means to direct the conversation back to the original post, I'll comment on this matter exactly once.

To say that Muhammad could be viewed through the prism of being a "man of his time" on the issue of slavery is incorrect. He was radically different, and while he did not attempt to completely abolish slavery he did make manumission rather than enslavement the normative in the Sunnah.

Just how deeply involved in manumission was Muhammad? For starters, he freed and then adopted a slave to be his son. Zayd ibn Haritha was then made a commander in the Muslim armies, and is among the most important members of the sahaba. Similarly, Muhammad encouraged Abu Bakr to free Bilal. Afterwards, Bilal was made treasurer of the early Islamic state. There's more than a few ahadith concerning the activity of manumission, it's even one of only two options for a Muslim to "make up" for obligatory fasting during Ramadan.

Now, to get back on track, I think what you're trying to say here is that the zealous nature of modern progressive politics seeks ideological purity. If progressive voices are completely honest with themselves, why don't they ahem "come for" complicated, largely non-white movements and figures they have aligned themselves with?

That's an easy one. The common thread is whiteness and the imposition of a white identity. It is viewed, in my opinion completely nonsensically, as being the causative agent in racism against everyone who falls under the rubric of "people of color." In addition when speaking of Muslims, there is a sentiment on the progressive left that we are a marginalized body. As victimhood is prized for them, ideologically, they see it as sensible to align themselves with us.

Keep in mind, I'm for the most part nobody's idea of a liberal. My highly conservative take on most social issues would make them clutch their pearls. But, because most of my co-religionists are brown and because we're subject to significantly more policing than other populations, there's cachet in identifying with our struggle (e.g. the Palestinian question, BOY do they love to wear a keffiyeh...)

I think where this conversation needs to be directed is how the left has become so open minded that its collective brain has fallen out. Abolish the police? Tacit support for political violence with apologia for rioters? The "problematic" nature of Paw Patrol (yes, that one is sadly real)?

There's a real issue here: the reality that black Americans are policed differently, that this has a body count, that we've never given proper redress for slavery, that there's a prison industrial complex in this country, that the wealth gap between white and black Americans is so absurd as to create two different Americas... It's just being muddled by the lunatic fringe currently speaking for everyone.

Thanks for getting my point.

 

[harryopal1]

Changes need to take place in classrooms across the US. Textbooks need to have their white washing of history removed and actual facts put in them. Children learn that yes, there was slavery. They learn of some of the people involved. Unfortunantly, there is a lot of information regarding it missing. George Washington cut down a cherry tree and admitted his guilt. Perhaps he had a family slave cut it down for him. With that cherry tree laying there, who cleaned it up? Thing is, many early American heros had slaves. This should be told. It doesn't lesson their efforts of designing and forming a new nation. It does complete the record of the person.

Too much of history taught in the US gets white washed. Of course, some Southern US textbooks have the Confederacy winning the Civil War.

At Australian schools in the late 40's and 50's we were taught about mostly British history and its heroes and that Britain stood for justice and what is right.

Australian history was that Captain Cook found Australia and after a couple of minor incidents with Aborigines the common cold and European diseases all but wiped them out. Later we learned of the term "smoothing the dying pillow" making it a bit easier for them before they all died.

The realities of the systematic destruction of Aboriginal peoples did really not start to become publicly known until the 60s as the knowledge of massacres across the country started to slip into the mainstream. Aborigines were pushed off their land and when they resisted there were punitive raids. In Tasmania there was an attempt to stretch a line of armed settlers across the island to round up the remaining Aborigines. Although many slipped through the line by the early 20th century there were few full blood Aboriginal people remaining.

Most larger groups of Aborigines across Australia were pushed into settlements with very basic provisions where they lived without rights and under the control or whims of settlement managers.

In the remote areas where huge cattle and sheep stations were established the Aborigines who had occupied these areas were used as cheap and basically slave labour.

In response to Black Lives Matter protests, just yesterday the Australian prime minister asserted in his usual jovial manner that a defining difference between America and Australia is that Australia did not have slavery.

One accepted definition of slavery is where a person is "...completely subservient to a dominating influence." Aboriginal people on cattle and sheep stations continued as slaves until award wages were required in 1966. The response then of most big stations was to kick the people off their land held in lease by station owners. Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders were only granted citizenship in 1967.

With large pineapple plantations in Queensland finding it hard to get labor towards the end of the 19th century it became commonplace for "blackbirding" where Pacific Islanders were taken in ships to work as slaves.

As for British heroes, one was Scott who perished in an attempt to be first to reach the south pole. We were not told about the Norwegian Amundsen who successfully reached and returned from the pole at that same time. And as for Britain standing for justice, I was living in Kenya when they began exhuming remains of hundreds tortured to death in concentration camps during the Mau Mau period. The atrocities of British forces in India are now well documented.

Creating just societies free of racism will be a long and continuing struggle but as Fastpitch points out we have yet to deal in real history and not the propaganda designed to make dominant societies look and feel good

 

[Nimbus]

This is from last year, but it illustrates the policing problem we have.


I got to wonder about the extent of police brutality in USA that was hidden before everybody has a video camera in their cell phone.

 

[rabbit_39]

where's the line before we decide that destroying statues are to be condemned just as we condemned the destruction of religious relics and statues?

 

[Nimbus]

where's the line before we decide that destroying statues are to be condemned just as we condemned the destruction of religious relics and statues?

I think it depends on the relevance to events today. When people fly the Confederate battle flag as an expression of white supremacy and rally around statues of Confederate generals, the statues become undesirable. Considering most of the monuments were erected as a symbol of Jim Crow, they become indefensible.

Statues of Lenin were toppled all over Russia and Eastern Europe when communism fell. Since the Soviet Union has been dead for almost 3 decades and its style of communism is not coming back, I think people today would actually protect any Lenin statue still left standing, for its historic value.

 

[Dan]

I grew up in the South. Confederate battle flags took a prominent place in public offices, at festivals, and even at Mardi Gras parades. I remember going to school and there would occasionally be a child with a Confederate battle flag shirt. Keep in mind, this wasn't the 1960s, it was 1980s and 1990s. We were taught two versions of the American Civil War in most history or social studies classes I had. There was the official version of the textbooks that identifies slavery as the root cause. Then there was typically a side conversation where our teachers would tell us what our parents told us: that it was "the war for state's rights" or even, in only one instance, "the war of northern aggression." The Confederacy weren't traitors or rebels in this version of history, they were secessionists exercising their right.

The Confederacy was a lost cause. For the historical revisionists among us in the South, there was a deep seated "need" to rewrite the story where our ancestors were heroic. A Southern white identity coalesced around symbols of the Confederacy because of this.

Today, things are very different. People under the age of say, 30, had a radically different experience. I'm not telling my children that the American Civil War was "the war for state's rights," and I expect most white Southerners no longer do so. We've become far removed from this alternative history.

So it's time to move on from symbols of the Confederacy, symbols of the lost cause. It came early for us here in New Orleans. Following the massacre of black church parishioners in Charleston by a white supremacist who posed in a photo with a Confederate battle flag, a major movement sprang up to take down four Confederate monuments in the city. One of those, the statue of Robert E. Lee was considered to be particularly iconic and even featured in much of the city's tourism advertising.

We did the right thing. We took them down despite objections. I had objections, too, and I still do. My question was, "what comes next?" These remain dead spaces. No new monuments have been erected, a new Southern identity has not yet been forged. To my mind, this is ultimately a half measure. If we're going to usher out the old order, we need to form a new identity, a new nationalism.

 

[ChrisTex]

NASCAR has banned the Confederate flag from their events. Some are speculating this will lead to new fans.

Like Dan, I have heard two versions of the Civil War, but they were combined. It was due to ending slavery and the issue of state rights.

 

[Nimbus]

A lot of people have the need to belong to something, to be part of a group they can be proud of. The key word is pride.

I think the need is strongest with poor people. They usually don’t go to prestigious schools nor universities. They don’t have high paying jobs to be proud of, nor celebrity fame. The only things left to brag about are their location and heritage.

In Indonesia (and UK) local football teams become symbols of local pride. Boneks from Surabaya have a reputation for violence, because the vast majority of them are poor young men. A poor young Surabayan man has virtually nothing to be proud of, except for the fact that he lives in the same town as Persebaya. He will go to great lengths to defend this pride.

Americans are big on team sport, but for some reason they don’t have nearly as much attachment to their home teams. Not enough for a serious fight anyway. So, if you’re in the South and you barely have two pennies to rub together, what can you be proud of? The Confederacy, of course. You may not have much today, but don’t forget that you’re a descendant of a force that almost defeated the United States.

I personally have little use for group symbols, because I’m in a relatively comfortable position in life, and have nothing to be ashamed of. I don’t work minimum wage jobs (anymore), so I don’t have to suffer the ignorance and rudeness of the general public that make me constantly question my self worth. I’m not ashamed to be an Indonesian and an American, but I have no need to derive pride from it. I can trace my lineage to an 18th century Javanese king and still technically have a royal title, but it’s just a matter of historical interest rather than pride. In short, I don’t have to look far outside myself and my circle for pride.

Would I have a different take on pride if I’m an ojek driver in Semarang? I think so. My royal heritage would be a bigger deal, and I’d be keen on pointing out the merits of Semarang. I’d be very quick to defend Indonesia from all perceived indignation, real or imagined, because it’s one of the few things I can be proud of.

 

[waarmstrong]

With a white supremacist in the White House, threatening to use the military to federalize law enforcement in states with approaches not to his liking, "states rights" is taking on a new meaning.

 

[waarmstrong]

Colin Kaepernick was nailed to the cross by NFL management and owners, now they are resurrecting him. The winds of change seem to be blowing in a new direction.

 

[Nimbus]

States rights? Basically they were fighting to preserve the freedom for a state to enslave black people. Sounds about right.

For people who insist that state rights fought for by Confederates had nothing to do with slavery, I invite them to read the Constitution of the Confederate States of America.

Constitution of the Confederate States of America - Wikisource, the free online library

en.wikisource.org

Article I, Section 9, Clause 4:
"No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed."

Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1:
"The citizens of each state shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states, and shall have the right of transit and sojourn in any state of this Confederacy, with their slaves and other property: and the right of property in said slaves shall not be thereby impaired. "

Article IV, Section 2, Clause 3:
"No slave or other person held to service or labor in any state or territory of the Confederate States, under the laws thereof, escaping or lawfully carried into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor: but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such slave belongs, or to whom such service or labor may be due. "

Article IV, Section 3, Clause 3:
"The Confederate States may acquire new territory; and Congress shall have power to legislate and provide governments for the inhabitants of all territory belonging to the Confederate States, lying without the limits of the several states; and may permit them, at such times, and in such manner as it may by law provide, to form states to be admitted into the Confederacy. In all such territory, the institution of negro slavery as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected by Congress, and by the territorial government: and the inhabitants of the several Confederate States and Territories, shall have the right to take to such territory any slaves lawfully held by them in any of the states or territories of the Confederate states. "

 

[Bad_azz]

I think there is a simpler option than tearing down the statues- and that is to put a large clear sign beside it with that person's history and a balanced narrative- that way it educates.
In an ideal world maybe erect a statue of the protagonist/antagonist side by side. With an objective sign stating the facts as much as are known.
Though I have no real interest in statues of people at all, I find them all rather unattractive, uninspiring & downright dull.