Quite ..... the problem with (our sort of) common sense, is that it does not appear to be anywhere near common enough anymore
(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome
turtlespeed 226
Quoteabout time...
QuoteThe U.S. Senate approved a fiercely worded resolution Thursday formally apologizing for the "fundamental injustice, cruelty, brutality, and inhumanity of slavery" of African-Americans.
The unanimous voice vote came five months after Barack Obama became the first black US president, and ahead of the June 19 "Juneteenth" celebration of the emancipation of African-Americans at the end of the U.S. Civil War in 1865.
The non-binding resolution now heads to the House of Representatives, where a similar resolution passed by voice vote in July 2008, only to wither in the upper chamber.
House approval, which could come as early as next week, would make it the first time the entire US Congress has formally apologized on behalf of the American people for one of the grimmest wrongs in US history.
The bill, which does not require Obama's signature, states that the US Congress "acknowledges the fundamental injustice, cruelty, brutality, and inhumanity of slavery and Jim Crow laws" that enshrined racial segregation at the state and local level in the United States well into the 1960s.
The Congress "apologizes to African-Americans on behalf of the people of the United States, for the wrongs committed against them and their ancestors who suffered under slavery and Jim Crow laws."
And it "expresses its recommitment to the principle that all people are created equal and endowed with inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and calls on all people of the United States to work toward eliminating racial prejudices, injustices, and discrimination from our society."
http://www.alternet.org/rss/3/62624/u.s._senate_votes_formal_apology_for_slavery/
I guess the next step is to have Egypt formally apologize to all the Jews, then the romans can do some apologizing, and well they still have forms of slavery in Africa and China - so I guess we should really start there first.
I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun
champu 1
I really don't know what to say to anyone who suddenly feels better because congress apologized for something.
Getting over and moving on from discrimination is not something a resolution, a bunch of money, or free rainbows is going to accomplish.
Getting over and moving on from discrimination is not something a resolution, a bunch of money, or free rainbows is going to accomplish.
That's the truth! Too many 'sensitive' types, anymore. Any apologies should've been made at the end of our civil war.
Chuck
Chuck
JohnRich 4
QuoteThat's the truth! Too many 'sensitive' types, anymore. Any apologies should've been made at the end of our civil war.
I guess the Emancipation Proclamation wasn't good enough.
"And upon this act, sincerely believed to be an act of justice, warranted by the Constitution, upon military necessity, I invoke the considerate judgment of mankind, and the gracious favor of Almighty God."
- Abraham Lincoln
QuoteQuoteThat's the truth! Too many 'sensitive' types, anymore. Any apologies should've been made at the end of our civil war.
I guess the Emancipation Proclamation wasn't good enough."And upon this act, sincerely believed to be an act of justice, warranted by the Constitution, upon military necessity, I invoke the considerate judgment of mankind, and the gracious favor of Almighty God."
- Abraham Lincoln
Maybe old Abe was not sincere enough for them or it is that he was not a democrat.
QuoteUnpacking Jim Crow 2.0
The right's positioning of white men as victims of racism involves an appropriation of the justice claims made by the civil rights movement. In Jim Crow 2.0, oppressed white men are the newest victims of racism, discrimination and inequality. Within this fictional world, the racial order has been so upset by the election of Obama that reverse racism against white Americans (an oxymoron that itself demands engagement and rebuttal) is now the rule of the land.
The assertion that white men are oppressed is a tactically sound move that accomplishes two goals. First, it positions conservatives and the Republican Party as the true defenders of equality, justice and freedom in America. Second, it mocks the centuries-long efforts by African Americans for freedom, equality and the fruits of full citizenship.
The sum result of these maneuvers is that the "struggle" to "liberate" white men from "reverse racism" and "oppression" is made the primary civil rights issue of our time. To accomplish this goal, the right-wing media ape and parrot the symbolism and language of the civil rights movement.
For example, Buchanan, in his discussions of the Frank Ricci case in Connecticut, repeatedly references the evils of Jim Crow and the unfair hiring practices that were used to deny black Americans equal access to jobs and promotions. Likewise, in Buchanan's discussions of Sotomayor and her oft-cited comment that a "wise Latina" judge could potentially make better legal decisions than a White male judge, he suggests that her confirmation will serve to revive the evils of "separate but equal" as embodied by the infamous United States Supreme Court case, Plessy v. Ferguson.
http://www.alternet.org/media/140740/whiny_conservatives%3A_how_dare_rich_white_guys_cry_about_oppression/
stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding
Quote
http://www.alternet.org/..
Great! More endless dribble from this site.
If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!
There ya' go! How quickly, some folks forget!
Good point, John!!!
Chuck
Good point, John!!!
Chuck
Andy9o8 2
QuoteQuoteThat's the truth! Too many 'sensitive' types, anymore. Any apologies should've been made at the end of our civil war.
I guess the Emancipation Proclamation wasn't good enough."And upon this act, sincerely believed to be an act of justice, warranted by the Constitution, upon military necessity, I invoke the considerate judgment of mankind, and the gracious favor of Almighty God."
- Abraham Lincoln
Historical note -the Empanicpation Proclamation was something less than the blanket "freeing of the slaves" that the modern re-telling of history has distilled it down to.
It was a wartime measure, which declared slaves free in certain states IF those states did not voluntarily lay down their arms and re-join the Union. None, did; but legally, had they done so, they would have been permitted to retain slavery.
Also, The proclamation did not name the border states of Kentucky, Missouri, Maryland, or Delaware, which had never declared a secession, and so it did not free any slaves there. The state of Tennessee had already mostly returned to Union control, so it also was not named and was exempted. Virginia was named, but exemptions were specified for the 48 counties that were in the process of forming West Virginia, as well as seven other named counties and two cities. Also specifically exempted were New Orleans and thirteen named parishes of Louisiana, all of which were also already mostly under Federal control at the time of the Proclamation.
QuoteQuoteThat's the truth! Too many 'sensitive' types, anymore. Any apologies should've been made at the end of our civil war.
I guess the Emancipation Proclamation wasn't good enough."And upon this act, sincerely believed to be an act of justice, warranted by the Constitution, upon military necessity, I invoke the considerate judgment of mankind, and the gracious favor of Almighty God."
- Abraham Lincoln
Since forms of slavery continued in the United States until well into the 20th century, no, it wasn't good enough. It turns out that you can proclaim laws all you want, but if you don't do shit to make sure people are actually following the laws, then they don't amount to much.
If you'd like to know more about what I'm talking about, check out the book "Slavery by Another Name", by Douglas Blackmon. It's available on Amazon.
rehmwa 2
QuoteIt turns out that you can proclaim laws all you want, but if you don't do shit to make sure people are actually following the laws, then they don't amount to much.
I think you just made the point of the thread. The Senate's action is pointless. Regardless of how any of us perceive today's social position on the subject.
In fact, you just made the point for immigration, gun laws, and a whole host of topics.
...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants
JohnRich 4
QuoteSince forms of slavery continued in the United States until well into the 20th century, no, it wasn't good enough. It turns out that you can proclaim laws all you want, but if you don't do shit to make sure people are actually following the laws, then they don't amount to much.
If you'd like to know more about what I'm talking about, check out the book "Slavery by Another Name", by Douglas Blackmon. It's available on Amazon.
So because the Emancipation Proclamation wasn't perfect, it's worthless?
Didn't it free a whole bunch of slaves?
Andy9o8 2
QuoteSo because the Emancipation Proclamation wasn't perfect, it's worthless?
Didn't it free a whole bunch of slaves?
Well... love means never having to say you're sorry.
QuoteQuoteSince forms of slavery continued in the United States until well into the 20th century, no, it wasn't good enough. It turns out that you can proclaim laws all you want, but if you don't do shit to make sure people are actually following the laws, then they don't amount to much.
If you'd like to know more about what I'm talking about, check out the book "Slavery by Another Name", by Douglas Blackmon. It's available on Amazon.
So because the Emancipation Proclamation wasn't perfect, it's worthless?
Didn't it free a whole bunch of slaves?
In words, it freed a whole bunch of slaves. And certainly many slaves did gain some form of freedom. However, following the Civil War, many slaves were still working the same plantation, unable to leave without the permission of the plantation owner, and were being "paid" with food and housing while continuing to be treated poorly. And those were the lucky neo-slaves. The unlucky ones got arrested for "vagrancy" by corrupt local sheriffs and then sold to corporations where they were often worked to death in less than a year.
As I said, just because the government says "Hey slaves! You're free now." doesn't mean that's what happened.
And to bring this conversation back around to what started it, while those posting here may not feel that there's anything to be gained by the United States apologizing for condoning slavery, the descendants of those slaves and even some of the slaves themselves might consider it differently.
I'd also point out that it's a lot easier for us, as a nation, to condemn the actions of others and claim the moral high ground once we've taken moral and ethical responsibility for our own poor actions from the past.
billvon 3,087
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)
>Didn't it free a whole bunch of slaves?
No, it didn't free a whole bunch of slaves. It did not apply to any slaves in states that the Union controlled, and at that point the Confederacy wasn't too interested in listening to Union presidents. To quote William H. Seward, "We show our sympathy with slavery by emancipating slaves where we cannot reach them and holding them in bondage where we can set them free."
That does not mean that it was useless, of course - just that it didn't immediately have the desired effect. It was still a good thing overall.
No, it didn't free a whole bunch of slaves. It did not apply to any slaves in states that the Union controlled, and at that point the Confederacy wasn't too interested in listening to Union presidents. To quote William H. Seward, "We show our sympathy with slavery by emancipating slaves where we cannot reach them and holding them in bondage where we can set them free."
That does not mean that it was useless, of course - just that it didn't immediately have the desired effect. It was still a good thing overall.
JohnRich 4
Quote>Didn't it free a whole bunch of slaves?
No, it didn't free a whole bunch of slaves. It did not apply to any slaves in states that the Union controlled, and at that point the Confederacy wasn't too interested in listening to Union presidents.
So there weren't a whole bunch of slaves in the southern states?
billvon 3,087
>So there weren't a whole bunch of slaves in the southern states?
Yes, there were.
Yes, there were.
JohnRich 4
Quote>So there weren't a whole bunch of slaves in the southern states?
Yes, there were.
And weren't those slaves set free by the Emancipation Proclamation?
billvon 3,087
>And weren't those slaves set free by the Emancipation Proclamation?
No. The Confederacy did not heed any proclamations from the Union.
Imagine if Canada passed a law that said "No US citizen in the United States can own a gun." Would that end gun ownership in the US?
No. The Confederacy did not heed any proclamations from the Union.
Imagine if Canada passed a law that said "No US citizen in the United States can own a gun." Would that end gun ownership in the US?
Andy9o8 2
QuoteI have to wonder why anyone would bitch about this resolution, like it's any skin off anyone's ass.
4 days on, and still no reasonable answer to this question posed.
QuoteQuoteI have to wonder why anyone would bitch about this resolution, like it's any skin off anyone's ass.
4 days on, and still no reasonable answer to this question posed.
Crime, drugs, milking the welfare system and now they want us to APOLOGIZE for something that happened so long ago?
![[:/]](/uploads/emoticons/dry.png "[:/]"){kind=small}
Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi
Chuck
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites