"He decries the “idea of throwing away the past because of your present values,” which means we must keep Columbus Day and Confederate statues forever, then explains, when Layla asks if good and bad are entirely a matter of historical context..."
This is not entirely wrong (the part about "judging the past according to present standards"), but is very disingenuous. That being said, when I was stationed for three years in Germany in the early 80s, I noticed a distinct paucity of statues dedicated to Adolf Hitler.
We can study history w/o being proud or ashamed. In fact, that is the way history is supposed to be studied. MAGAts want the glory w/o the shame, but you can't have either w/o the other.
Hypocrisy is their whole game. They believe that anything they're doing, others are doing worse, because in their minds the way they operate is the *only* way to operate. They literally can't conceive of a world in which other people don't do the depraved shit they do, because they can't possibly do any wrong, right? They're on the side of GOD!
"The productions from PragerU Kids are just as tendentious and fallacious as the adult offerings..."
I shall watch these videos only after breakable objects and other creatures have been removed from my vicinity, but from Dok's descriptions of them, I am sure that they are both tendentious and sententious.
Tell me you’re joking. These Prager U videos line up with Floridas educational standards? Their kids are going to be laughingstocks when they go out into the world if they learn this stuff!!
Here is where I would link to The Oatmeal's excellent "Fuck Columbus" cartoon, except that I'm at work and don't want to go to his website lest it trigger some nanny monitoring software on the network.
I expect more apologists for slavery and eventually a suggestion that people who commit crimes should be sentenced to being owned by the people who they allegedly harmed.
Prager-not-a-U goes right up to the edge of saying, “slavery is only bad when nonwhite people do it,” and just barely stops short of saying it. Though I’m sure Dennis P was dying to.
You could hire the best satirists in the world to produce videos lampooning the conservative views on history and they could never come up with anything as insane as Prager-not-a-UKids. They are beyond parody.
The Europeans went in for all kinds of gruesome executions (even the Aztecs thought they were needlessly cruel), especially when it came to ideological crimes. The 100 year Tudor dynasty in England makes the 300 year Spanish Inquisition look civilized and merciful by comparison.
So does he mention the children taken away to live (for however long they survived) in sexual slavery? That's probably not bad either. They may have learned some "useful skills."
"Adult offerings have included lie-fests claiming that modern Democrats are no different from the founders of the KKK (because 1964 never happened) and that There Was No Southern Strategy."
This obliterates not only 1964, but most of the political history of the Twentieth Century.
During the 1920s, immigrant-friendly Democrats in the North built a less racist alternative to the Dixiecrats in the South. At the same time, the KKK spread its influence in the Party of Lincoln as well as the Party of Dixie, so that the attitudes of both with respect to African-Americans became more similar.
During the 1930s, Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Eleanor Roosevelt allied themselves so strongly with the poor rather than the rich that African-Americans started to switch to the Democratic Party where they were allowed to vote at all, which is to say, in the North.
In 1948, another Democratic President, Harry S. Truman, racially integrated the military by executive order.
In 1957, President Eisenhower sent federal troops to defend the Little Rock Nine against the racist state militia of Governor Orval Faubus. The Republican Party was still able to do the right thing back then.
In 1964, Senator Barry Goldwater ran for President and thought it was a good idea to turn against the Civil Rights Movement and join the racist dog-whistling States' Rights Movement. But he lost badly, and his party wasn't ready to try to emulate him until a few years later. In contrast, President Lyndon B. Johnson, a Southern Democrat, supported the Civil Rights Act and went on to win re-election by a landslide. The following year, Johnson supported the Voting Rights Act. Both laws had the support of a LOT of Republicans and in fact would have failed without this support.
As late as 1968, a lot of white Southern bubbas still weren't ready to vote Republican. They voted for third-party candidate George Wallace instead. But President Nixon still won. And though Nixon conformed to the anti-racist spirit of the age -- he even supported affirmative action! -- he also advanced the art of racist dog-whistling about "law and order."
The greatest dog-whistler, however, was Ronald Reagan, who finally, in 1980, persuaded the bubbas of the South that they should be Republicans. Probably it took them this long because they really weren't very smart, no more than they are today.
So my point is that this was a VERY LONG development. The Party of Lincoln didn't become the Party of Trump overnight. It took decades, and there were a lot of very obvious milestones on this journey of many miles. So I have no patience for people who pretend that none of this ever happened.
Throughout most of US history, both parties had liberal and conservative wings and they were more likely fight amongst themselves than with members of the opposing parties.
Nixon got the ball rolling but Reagan finally killed off the GOP’s liberal wing. I remember pundits as late as 1988 wondering out loud what happened to the “liberal wing of the GOP” that apparently some people thought George H W Bush had once belonged to.
With the Dixiecrats fully on board the GOP, the democrats became known as the liberal party almost by default. But many relics hung on to the old relationship. Billy Graham was still a democrat until he died, for example. Even today, a few who might once have been called Dixiecrats (coughJoeManchincough) exist.
But a liberal Republican today is a conflict in terms.
"He decries the “idea of throwing away the past because of your present values,” which means we must keep Columbus Day and Confederate statues forever, then explains, when Layla asks if good and bad are entirely a matter of historical context..."
This is not entirely wrong (the part about "judging the past according to present standards"), but is very disingenuous. That being said, when I was stationed for three years in Germany in the early 80s, I noticed a distinct paucity of statues dedicated to Adolf Hitler.
We can study history w/o being proud or ashamed. In fact, that is the way history is supposed to be studied. MAGAts want the glory w/o the shame, but you can't have either w/o the other.
Remind me again how drag queens are groomers, as I think there may be MAGA hypocrisy afoot.
Hypocrisy is their whole game. They believe that anything they're doing, others are doing worse, because in their minds the way they operate is the *only* way to operate. They literally can't conceive of a world in which other people don't do the depraved shit they do, because they can't possibly do any wrong, right? They're on the side of GOD!
"The productions from PragerU Kids are just as tendentious and fallacious as the adult offerings..."
I shall watch these videos only after breakable objects and other creatures have been removed from my vicinity, but from Dok's descriptions of them, I am sure that they are both tendentious and sententious.
A nicens cat on your lap and a well packed bong might help.
Tell me you’re joking. These Prager U videos line up with Floridas educational standards? Their kids are going to be laughingstocks when they go out into the world if they learn this stuff!!
"Being taken as a slave is better than being killed, no?"
Whatever happened to "Give me liberty, or give me death?" Fucking unamerican commies.
Why are those the only two options?? These people are bananas!
I think they may actually be on to something. "Oh, you got raped? Better than being killed, no?" This could be yuge for them.
Here is where I would link to The Oatmeal's excellent "Fuck Columbus" cartoon, except that I'm at work and don't want to go to his website lest it trigger some nanny monitoring software on the network.
I'm at home, so here you go:
https://theoatmeal.com/comics/columbus_day
Hope this is what you mean.
I love The Oatmeal.
Yep, that’s the one.
"Did you have a question, Layla?"
"Well...what about Patrick Henry and "Give Me Liberty Or Give Me Death!"
"Go away, kid, you bother me.
Now you, Leo...would you like to meet a real Catholic priest?"
"“vicious warring cannibals,” wtf?
Cannibals?
i am enraged and sickened by this - do better florida
I expect more apologists for slavery and eventually a suggestion that people who commit crimes should be sentenced to being owned by the people who they allegedly harmed.
It's all about that grift. DeSantis and pals are funneling education dollars to PU in order to lie to children at the taxpayer's expense.
Cause it is ALL about that grift. Keeping people uneducated- and voting for Republican- is also part of that grift.
Ta, Robyn. I'm glad I never had children. That is one decision I never have regretted, and never will.
Prager-not-a-U goes right up to the edge of saying, “slavery is only bad when nonwhite people do it,” and just barely stops short of saying it. Though I’m sure Dennis P was dying to.
You could hire the best satirists in the world to produce videos lampooning the conservative views on history and they could never come up with anything as insane as Prager-not-a-UKids. They are beyond parody.
"...human sacrifice..."
ButWhaddaboutda: Catherine Wheel, drawn and quartered, keel hauling...
https://historycollection.com/20-facts-about-excruciating-methods-of-execution-and-torture-in-history/3/
The Europeans went in for all kinds of gruesome executions (even the Aztecs thought they were needlessly cruel), especially when it came to ideological crimes. The 100 year Tudor dynasty in England makes the 300 year Spanish Inquisition look civilized and merciful by comparison.
So does he mention the children taken away to live (for however long they survived) in sexual slavery? That's probably not bad either. They may have learned some "useful skills."
"Adult offerings have included lie-fests claiming that modern Democrats are no different from the founders of the KKK (because 1964 never happened) and that There Was No Southern Strategy."
This obliterates not only 1964, but most of the political history of the Twentieth Century.
During the 1920s, immigrant-friendly Democrats in the North built a less racist alternative to the Dixiecrats in the South. At the same time, the KKK spread its influence in the Party of Lincoln as well as the Party of Dixie, so that the attitudes of both with respect to African-Americans became more similar.
During the 1930s, Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Eleanor Roosevelt allied themselves so strongly with the poor rather than the rich that African-Americans started to switch to the Democratic Party where they were allowed to vote at all, which is to say, in the North.
In 1948, another Democratic President, Harry S. Truman, racially integrated the military by executive order.
In 1957, President Eisenhower sent federal troops to defend the Little Rock Nine against the racist state militia of Governor Orval Faubus. The Republican Party was still able to do the right thing back then.
In 1964, Senator Barry Goldwater ran for President and thought it was a good idea to turn against the Civil Rights Movement and join the racist dog-whistling States' Rights Movement. But he lost badly, and his party wasn't ready to try to emulate him until a few years later. In contrast, President Lyndon B. Johnson, a Southern Democrat, supported the Civil Rights Act and went on to win re-election by a landslide. The following year, Johnson supported the Voting Rights Act. Both laws had the support of a LOT of Republicans and in fact would have failed without this support.
As late as 1968, a lot of white Southern bubbas still weren't ready to vote Republican. They voted for third-party candidate George Wallace instead. But President Nixon still won. And though Nixon conformed to the anti-racist spirit of the age -- he even supported affirmative action! -- he also advanced the art of racist dog-whistling about "law and order."
The greatest dog-whistler, however, was Ronald Reagan, who finally, in 1980, persuaded the bubbas of the South that they should be Republicans. Probably it took them this long because they really weren't very smart, no more than they are today.
So my point is that this was a VERY LONG development. The Party of Lincoln didn't become the Party of Trump overnight. It took decades, and there were a lot of very obvious milestones on this journey of many miles. So I have no patience for people who pretend that none of this ever happened.
The "Party of Lincoln," is totally the party of Reagan now. And unless yer a Reagan Revisionist, that's a huge black mark, IMO.
Throughout most of US history, both parties had liberal and conservative wings and they were more likely fight amongst themselves than with members of the opposing parties.
Nixon got the ball rolling but Reagan finally killed off the GOP’s liberal wing. I remember pundits as late as 1988 wondering out loud what happened to the “liberal wing of the GOP” that apparently some people thought George H W Bush had once belonged to.
With the Dixiecrats fully on board the GOP, the democrats became known as the liberal party almost by default. But many relics hung on to the old relationship. Billy Graham was still a democrat until he died, for example. Even today, a few who might once have been called Dixiecrats (coughJoeManchincough) exist.
But a liberal Republican today is a conflict in terms.
Didn't that wing of the GOP die out w/Rockefeller?
They were dwindling down, but Reagan put them out of their misery.