What Does "Take back our country" actually mean in the 21st century?
"Take back our country" in the current right wing meaning has its inception in the Tea Party era of 2009-2011. Why that era, why then ? There is really only one true meaning, and that is the country had to be taken back from the first black president and those who supported him.
Around the time Obama was running for president social scientists and demographers began to predict that America was on a course to be a "majority minority" country within a few decades, meaning whites would become a numerical minority of the population. As this sunk in, it freaked many white people out. The Tea Party had a lot of element of racism
as a reaction to the first black president and the changing national demographics. Of course, as we know, birtherism grew out of this. In 2011 Trump based his potential run for president in 2012 on appealing to birthers in the Republican voting base. It is safe to say that the majority of birthers were/are racist to one degree or another.
When Trump eventually ran in 2015 this "base" remembered 2011, and had the welcome mat out for Trump. "Take back our country" became an important rallying cry. So it persists until today, as we see from Trump's using it in a speech over the weekend.
Why do so many Trump cultists disregard all the evidence, which is astronomical, of Trump's unfitness for office?
Because "Take back our country"
=============================
related
fivethirtyeight.com /features/who-gets-to-be-a-real-american-has-always-been-about-exclusion/
Who Gets To Be A ‘Real American’ Has Always Been About Exclusion
Kiara Alfonseca 9-11 minutes 2/23/2022
When Sen. Mitch McConnell was asked, last month, about the concerns that people of color have about their voting access in the upcoming midterm elections, he responded by saying : “The concern is misplaced because if you look at the statistics, African American voters are voting in just as high a percentage as Americans.”
You could say McConnell’s comment and the way it differentiated between African Americans and Americans was just an inartful phrasing or a slip of the tongue. But it comes as Republicans around the U.S. have proposed and enacted laws that make it harder for people to vote, especially voters of color and young voters.
In fact, whatever he personally intended, McConnell’s “slip of the tongue” was no slip at all: Throughout U.S. history, white people and institutions have sought to define American identity in a way that excludes people of color, and language has been an important tool in that effort. McConnell’s comment fits neatly into that history.
There’s a long history of patriotic rhetoric that equates Americanness with whiteness — a tactic that influences the public’s perceptions of American belonging and who gets political or social power, according to research.
“Whatever we typically think of as patriotic language often puts borders in place about who counts and who doesn’t count,” said Lisa A. Flores, a professor at the University of Colorado Boulder, and political rhetoric researcher.
“Some of us are not even real Americans. We’re suspect, right? And our bodies are a problem to the nation.”
Much of this language can seem innocent enough in that it doesn’t mention race or ethnicity outright. Think “real” or “regular” Americans , the “ silent majority ,” “ take our country back ” and “ make America great again .”
That kind of coded language has a long history in U.S. politics. Take, for instance, “take back our country.” The phrase was one of the last things former President Donald Trump uttered in his speech before the Jan. 6 insurrection. “We’re going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country,” Trump said.
Variations of that phrase were also a favorite of the tea party , which sprang to life in no small part in reaction to the election of the nation’s first Black president. Former KKK leader David Duke used the phrase while explaining the purpose of 2017’s “Unite the Right” demonstration in Charlottesville, and in his concession speech after losing the race for Louisiana governor in 1991.
Pat Buchanan, who ran a race-baiting campaign for president in 1992, ended his address to the Republican National Convention that year by saying, “We must take back our cities, and take back our culture, and take back our country.”
George Wallace, former Alabama governor and presidential candidate, ran on the slogan “Stand Up For America” in the 1960s. The motto couched campaigns marred by racism, pro-segregation sentiments and Wallace’s love of the “the great Anglo-Saxon Southland.” He was elected to the governor’s office four times.
This kind of rhetoric is powerful because it allows racism to play out right in front of people’s faces, according to Jamaal Muwwakkil, a socio-linguist and Ph.D. candidate at the University of California, Santa Barbara.
It’s left unsaid who exactly the country is being taken back from.
“It passively establishes a hierarchy of Americans on the status of authenticity,” said Muwwakkil. “It is based on the user and the listener to fill in those gaps that aren’t stated explicitly with what they understand to be more authentic characteristics of American.”
Painting nonwhite, urban, non-Christian Americans as “fake,” illegitimate or not-the-standard American implies that these populations are less worthy of political or social representation, the experts I spoke with said.
“We start to use language and we don’t even recognize we’re doing it. You’ve got good people all over the country who are using [this] language, and not intending to be racist,” Flores said. “And that’s the most important piece, because they may not even know how much [Americans have] bought into white supremacy as individuals and as a nation.”
Language like this has been used to implicitly signal white voters, Flores said.
“One of the ways that our brains sort of makes sense of the world around us is that we’re really good at detecting patterns,” said Efrén O Pérez, a professor of Political Science and Psychology at UCLA. “Anytime you use language in that way, you’re tapping into the various associations that people might have with categories, with certain ideas, with certain values.”
As Flores and Pérez note, language — political rhetoric in particular — is an effective tool to activate this exclusionary version of American identity. In “White Identity Politics,” Duke University political scientist Ashley E. Jardina argues that white racial grievances have a more powerful effect on political beliefs when white people perceive themselves as under threat. As Michael Tesler, a FiveThirtyEight contributor and professor of political science at the University of California, Irvine, wrote , that’s “one reason why Trump was so effective in his many appeals to the cultural , economic and physical threats that they were supposedly facing.”
Indeed, lots of research has found that Trump’s racist and racialized rhetoric in 2016 helped him win support from white voters who had “conservative” views on race, including many who had previously cast a ballot for then-President Barack Obama in 2012.
The rhetoric matters.
And it matters beyond elections. This type of language both flows from and reinforces a belief among some Americans, particularly white Americans, that national identity is defined, in part, by whiteness, research has found.
For example, a 2005 paper in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, “American = White?,” looked at six separate studies on the subject. Overall, it found that African Americans and Asian Americans were viewed as being less American than white Americans (Latinos and Hispanics were not featured in this study).
That’s despite the fact that both African Americans and white Americans were perceived as having strong ties to American culture. African Americans were seen as more related to a “foreign” label than white Americans, and Asian Americans were not merely viewed as foreigners, but were more likely to be excluded from the “American” label altogether.
A 2015 study from the same journal found that white Americans reported concerns that the group’s long-standing claim of being “All-American,” and the term’s growing precarity, may create a growing opposition to diversity.
“Gains for minority groups somehow represent a loss for some groups of white people,” said Juliet Hooker, a professor of Political Science at Brown University.
Moreover, political language and law go hand-in-hand, experts said. Where racism flows, discriminatory laws may follow.
“The law was used as a way of defining who’s American and who’s not along racial lines,” said Kevin Johnson, professor of public interest law at the University of California, Davis. “We should remember that our discriminatory history of immigration laws tells us a little bit about what we are as a nation, and we should pay attention to that.”
This can be seen in the 1790 Naturalization Act , the 1882 Immigration Act , the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act or Trump’s 2017 Muslim ban . The law has continuously been used to identify and delegate who can be considered an American or worthy of representation in the U.S.
And, of course, it’s no coincidence that McConnell’s comment came in a conversation about elections, where who counts as a “true” American is most clearly and literally at stake. Throughout American history, laws have been enacted to deny people of color the vote and representation.
Several policies during the Reconstruction and Jim Crow era limited Black voters’ access to elections using loopholes in the 15th amendment that was supposed to guarantee voting rights for Black men. Poll taxes, literacy tests, felony disenfranchisement laws and intimidation are just some of the many ways that Black voters were shunned from the polls.
Ongoing redistricting efforts and recent voting restrictions have been dubbed the “new Jim Crow” because of their disproportionate impact on voters of color.
Roughly 20 states have restricted voting access since the 2020 election, following Trump’s false claim of widespread election fraud, the Brennan Center for Justice reports .
Indeed, you can see these perceptions about who’s a “true” American, and the language that surrounds those beliefs, in Trump’s false claims of fraud in the 2020 election.
They have resulted not only in a majority of Republicans believing the 2020 election was stolen from Trump, according to polls , but in a myriad of efforts to find fraud (none of which have succeeded). But look at where those efforts focused: According to Hooker they targeted, “ multiracial cities and cities with large Black populations.”
The idea, Hooker added, is that Trump and his supporters lost because of people who, in their view, shouldn’t get a say at all, and certainly shouldn’t be able to determine the outcome of a U.S. election.
Tags
Who is online
96 visitors
To this day the main element in Trumps existence as a viable politician is white grievance.
Then Hillary Clinton was obsessed with "white grievance."
In her speech at the Democratic National Committee’s Winter Meeting last Friday, Senator Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) stressed taking control of the country back from the Bush administration and changing the direction in which it has been heading for the last six years. Those efforts, Clinton said, must begin now with the Democratic majorities in Congress and extend through the 2008 election.
“When I am president, working with a Democratic Congress,” she said, “we will really take our country back and put it on the right track again.”
Clinton: We Have To Take Our Country Back | The Hill
I'd drop the racist insinuation if I were you.
Vic, I seem to know a lot more about this than you do.
Racists love Trump: This is what they mean by "taking the country …
Web - Donald Trump, February 1, 2016 The “take our country back” slogan first emerged with the Tea Party movement in 2009. It was never quite clear what that meant. Where did the …
Oh, that's quite a retort.
I doubt our readers would be impressed.
Lol...An opinion piece by Salon????
Your readers are confused.
When Donald Trump calls black prosecutors "racist", which has done many times, who do you think he is trying to appeal to ?
That indicates racism?
What it means is that democrats have placed certain groups in bubbles.
John you can do better than that, as a matter of fact you have to. I don't know if you've noticed but you are all the left has today.
Court Rules North Dakota Voting Map Discriminates Against Native American Voters
This decision was made on November 17th 2023.
There are many black racists. Trump is not alone:
A top New York Republican accused Attorney General Letitia James of racism toward white people.
“It seems to me she targets white guys quite bit and white Republicans especially,” Rensselaer County Executive Steven McLaughlin told The Post. “Just because you’re black doesn’t mean you’re not racist. You can be black and be racist, just like you can be white and be racist.”
Rensselaer county executive accuses Letitia James of racism (nypost.com)
[✘]
I have always been a one man army in certain circles. I am used to it.
I was at a family party over the weekend where, out of about 20 adults, I was the only one who is not a Trump supporter. I am very used to it.
Oh, by the way , at this family party the subject came up of why my niece, who moved from Chicago to Indiana to get away from black people, is now afraid to go to some malls that she could otherwise go to. Wanna guess why? It seems her "problem" exists a little bit in her new Indiana area too.
These people talk derogatorily about blacks as a matter of course, they dont even realize what they are saying half the time. I am quite sure that my Irish American family and friends from the south side of Chicago are not unique across the country.
hmmm, but did it really?
Seems our Democrat leaders were using that slogan even before the start of the Tea Party. Seems shameful to ignore history.
They're not. They are ubiquitous in Western PA where I grew up. Most of my family had no problems saying the "N" word
What this clearly demonstrates is that democrats feel that minorities are inferior, and republicans feel they are equal. assistance should be based on need not skin color, democrats just naturally assume you need help based on skin color because of racism. mainly their own.
Ah Vic, once again a lie. I addressed the headdress not the boy since he isn't responsible. And you can't respond to my comment over the republican redistricting that violated NAs voting rights.
Sad, but not unexpected.
It is somewhat understandable that most white people want to downplay everyday racism in America, after all who wants to admit they are racially prejudiced? But that doesnt make it right.
“…and republicans feel they are equal.”
But separate.
That story fell perfectly didn't it?
Nobody knew until later of that young boy's ancestry:
Howard Dean wrote a book called "Winning Back America".
Damn Racist.
And most abundant where I grew up in Boston MA.
Most of my family had no problems saying the "N" word
The Boston Irish once had problems with lots of different people, but NO LONGER.
I have never in my life known of a "liberal" who moved to another state to get away from racial minorities. By the way , my nieces brother is doing the same for the same reason.
That thought came from you, not surprising being a democrat, your parties thoughts on segregation are well documented, it appears nothing has changed, thanks for letting us know that.
It is somewhat understandable that most white people are tired of being called racist for not agreeing with everything the left tries to shovel.
“Whitey” Bulger made sure of that?
Doubt it - look at your sources - "Salon"?????
What is that you don’t understand, Vic? You made a comment to me that was’t true and avoided my comment to you and now come back with more CYA and still haven’t responded to my comment.
Give it up you’r starting to look foolish.
The apples didn’t fall far from the tree, did they?
Sorry John - you still know nothing.
Newt Ginrich made that statement and even had the Repubs sign "The Pledge".
Trump, your favorite target, wasn't there.
[trolling]
So why does Trump have a growing number of minority voters?
Prove me wrong...you can't do it.
A BLM leader just endorsed Trump.
Donald Trump's 'BLM' Endorsement Draws Loud Applause From Supporters (msn.com)
NOPE!
New polls by The New York Times and Siena College found that 22 percent of Black voters in six of the most important battleground states said they would support former President Donald J. Trump in next year’s election, and 71 percent would back Mr. Biden.
The drift in support is striking, given that Mr. Trump won just 8 percent of Black voters nationally in 2020 and 6 percent in 2016, according to the Pew Research Center. A Republican presidential candidate has not won more than 12 percent of the Black vote in nearly half a century.
Here it is out of his mouth. If someone said it was debunked they were lying to you.
Fake news.
Trump's Surprising Appeal Among Black and Hispanic Voters - Bloomberg
Voters of color are a big reason Trump leads the GOP primary | CNN Politics
Donald Trump grabbing more Black and Hispanic voters in polls - Washington Times
Black Voters’ Shift to Trump Is a Warning Sign for Biden, Strategists Say - The New York Times (nytimes.com)
Why Trump won a larger share of the Black vote in 2020 than in 2016 - Vox
The Trump vote is rising among Blacks and Hispanics, despite the conventional wisdom (nbcnews.com)
New York times is fake news?
See 2.1.7
Damn. A BLM chapter that actually cares about blacks. Who would have thought.
Probably why he is a former member.
They live in a fantasy world detached from reality, where their racialist obsessions never change. As you point out, Trump's improved his standing among every demographic group except white men since 2016, but they can't psychologically handle that. So they have to cling to the belief its "white men" they are fighting, because that's the lens they view the world. It's circullar logic. Minorities are always right, and they stand with minorities, so minorities must oppose Trump .
You’re not very good at this.
You have placed people in a bubble.
Take a look at what was once the only nationwide butter manufacturer has done to its logo:
Because of the white guilt of progressives?
That's why I quit buying that brand
[Deleted]
Nah, if I eat pancakes or rice it is at a restaurant, although they were both quality products. But I do buy butter
Actually they are the only ones with white guilt and are trying to force everyone to feel their guilt.
Do you have a cigar store Indian on your porch?
Its funny how the same people who are anti black are also anti American Indian and anti brown. At least they have a certain consistency.
Well of course it was removed. It's not our land anymore, right? Speaking as an Indian of course.
Not at all, according to the CEO of Land O' Lakes it was to better identify with their roots and the change was made on their 100th anniversy. Land O Lakes is a co-op of around 1700 dairy farmers and was formed by them in 1923.
Headquartered in Arden Hills, MN some of the dairy farmers are Ojibwe. In fact the last two revisions of her were done by Ojibwe artists the last being done by Red Lake Ojibwe artist Patrick DesJarlait in 1954 who went on to create many famous logos in the art world.
Actually, the scene behind Mia is the narrows between upper and lower Red Lake which any Ojibwe recognizes instantly.
Oh, and many Indians liked the image as well including myself.
It's always good to know the real story instead of trying to pass off BS as fact.
"Ongoing redistricting efforts and recent voting restrictions have been dubbed the “new Jim Crow” because of their disproportionate impact on voters of color".
What redistricting and voter restrictions are being discussed, and how are they disproportionately impacting voters of color. According to Democrats, the 2020 and 2022 elections were the most open and honest in history.
What did it mean when John Kerry said it?
No one has said it more than MAGA, and before them the tea party/ birthers. There is actually no real argument about what all this means, but I suppose we will have to continue suffering through the nonsense of right wing whataboutism.
Execept when Democrats made it a theme in 2004.
It's just so childish. A Democrat uses a common phrase and it's perfectly fine. Republican uses the same phrase and it's full of secet messages conveying racist dog whistles. How can anyone take this nonsense seriously?
By the way, racist dog whistles are only heard by racists. When I hear "take our country back" race has nothing to do with it's meaning. Funny how quick liberals hear a dog whistle though.
LOL. You need to read more, or better.
Hillary brought up the issue of Obama's birth, and your claims that the country is awash in white supremacy and racism are still wrong and the accusations of such are absurd
Hillary Cliton disavowed birtherism as soon as she heard about it. Your whacked conspiracy theories belong in a junkpile.
She was the first to do it. She is the master of dirty politics.
Fortunately, she wreaks of it and people won't vote for her.
Why do so many people keep supporting Donald Trump (who is obviously unfit to hold office, even dogcatcher ) ? There is more than one reason, but "white grievance" is right there among the top of the list. Its almost comical to watch people try and deny it.
[Deleted]
Its amazing how eager you are to defend the indefensible Donald Trump. I think it is one of the great mysteries of Newstalkers.
Actually, my standing on Trump is much more solid than your hate for him. I can't stand the person - I like "some" of his policies.
But you can't say that.
There are other people who can promote his "policies", people who are not pathological lying traitors. Get behind one of them.
This is how she disavowed it????
Hillary’s motivations were clear. She flunked her first pseudo debate with Trump on NBC’s Commander in Chief forum earlier this month, placed herself in hot water when she declared half of Trump’s supporters were in a basket of deplorables, and further sowed seeds of mistrust when she lied about her health. She had to change the narrative.
“Hold out baits to entice the enemy,” wrote Sun Tzu, “feign disorder, and crush him.” Hillary, by baiting Trump with the birther controversy, was hoping the outspoken candidate would respond in a manner than that was undisciplined and unpresidential. She was hoping Trump would be Trump. It was a gamble she lost.
“ President Barack Obama was born in the United States, period,” Trump said in response . “Now, we all want to get back to making America strong and great again.”
Trump’s response — short and simple — showed a candidate who was not only more disciplined but a candidate who understood he was in the lead. It showed a candidate that was willing to shrug of a desperate attack in order to stay on a script that has brought Ohio, Florida, North Carolina, and Colorado back in play.
Moreover, Trump turned the issue back on Hillary. In laughing off the attack, Trump reminded America that the so called seeds of birtherism were planted by Team Clinton during her rough and tumble primary with Obama in 2008. He also reminded the American people that he was the one who settled the issue , thus removing the cloud hanging over Obama’s head.
“Hillary Clinton and her campaign of 2008 started the birther controversy,” Trump said. “I finished it.”
So far, there's not a single candidate for President, of either/any party, that I would even consider voting for - even if I had taken enough peyote before I voted.
The article you are quoting is nonsense. Watch this video and try and learn something about what was happening.
Sorry John - would rather believe what is published in "The Hill" than attempt to listen to Goldie and her activism against everything she doesn't like. Yeah, she and Whoopie made a great team on "The View", another "We hate everything" show for has-beens.
The article you quoted is nonsense. Deal with it.
There is really only one true meaning, and that is the country had to be taken back from the first black president and those who supported him.
The phrase has been used long before Obama but in a lame attempt to make everything about race some folks just change the meaning. Seems some on the left do that alot.
In 2011 Donald Trump wanted to run for president in 2012, but he had no political base. So he created one, racist birthers. He ended up not running because Obama humiliated Trump by releasing his long form birth certificate.
But when Trump ran in 2015, his "base" remembered him.
Phrase still goes back way before that. Even before Trump.
Where do you come up with that crap????
Obama is the one who created and pushed racism - constantly and consistently. "Hey Black college professor - let's have a beer and talk 'bout how that white cop, who was absolutely correct in his actions, targeted you because you are black."
Typically stupid move by Obama.
Why do you think Trump became the king birther , when in 2011 it was somewhat dying out before he revived it? Trump wanted to run for president in 2012, but had no natural political base , so he tried to manufacture one from birthers. Even though Trump is an idiot, he was smart enough to know that at that time 75 or 80 percent of Republicans believed Obama wasnt eligible to be president. .
Republican Contract with America
The provisions of the contract proved quite popular with the public even though many people were unfamiliar with the contract itself. Republicans gained fifty-four House seats and nine Senate seats in the elections, and the contract was seen as a success by party leaders. The contract then became a focus of the Republican legislative agenda, denying President Bill Clinton working control of Congress. The contract formed a foundation for Republican policymaking as members of Congress pushed for reducing the size of government, lowering taxes, emphasizing entrepreneurship, establishing tort reform, and bringing about welfare reform. These measures resulted in several important pieces of legislation, none probably more important than welfare reform, which was signed into law by President Clinton. The contract also brought unity and cohesiveness to Republicans, especially in the House of Representatives.
none probably more important than welfare reform, - and there is your "foundation" for the stupid, ridiculous, idiotic "racism" claims that you always have.
How will the race baiter majority protect and defend the sovereign interests of the United States? Will the race baiter majority volunteer to be the world's police force? Will the race baiter majority volunteer to fight and die in some sand pit where the indigenous population hates Americans and will undermine the United States at every opportunity?
The race baiters apparently only care about money. So, what happens when the race baiter majority is responsible for paying the taxes for foreign aid to countries that hate Americans? What happens when the United Nations wants to take the race baiter's money? Or France? Or Vietnam? Or Peru?
The call to 'take back our country' is a call to prioritize American sovereign interests. Right now foreign special interests have as much influence over American policy and priorities as does citizens of the United States. Our politics has been dominated by the demands of foreign special interests which has overwhelmed the sovereign interests of the United States. Our politics argues about immigration of foreign nationals, security needs of foreign countries, economic development in foreign regions. The world has been sucking resources out of the United States and has been using the United States as a dumping ground for its problems.
Even the birther movement against Obama highlighted that the country would be run according to Kenyan interests and not sovereign interests of the United States.
LOL
Double LOL
Well, liberals have undermined the sovereignty of the United States. In case no one has noticed, the world is already a brown majority. And the brown majority of the world is beginning to exert more influence over American politics and policy.
The black/brown population of India is becoming more important in American politics and policy than the Black population of Detroit. That's because the United States has to compete with China (which is not dominated by a white population).
Why hasn't the brown majority made the world a better place?
“Why hasn't the brown majority made the world a better place?”
Wow.
As if we didn’t already know where your beliefs lie, just let that comment sink in.
And just what have those you do believe in wrought to make the ‘world a better place’?
The race baiters ignore that only 15 pct of the world's population is white. So, after 50,000 years why does the non-white population still dump its problems onto the shoulders of a world's minority population? Why hasn't the world's majority non-white population even figured out how to feed itself? How to provide water for itself? How to shelter and clothe itself? Why does the world's brown majority beg the white population for help?
Are the race baiters going to excuse the failings of the world's majority brown population by accusing the minority white population of being superior?
“Are the race baiters going to excuse the failings of the world's majority brown population by accusing the minority white population of being superior? “
Who is the ‘race baiter’ ?
He must have skipped school the days they were talking about colonization and exploitation. Damn liberal teachers.
But he wears ‘manifest destiny’ like a badge.
Well, who can argue with that? God ordained it. /s
At least the Pope did....
The race baiters are those who characterize 'take back our country' as a racist dog whistle. The race baiters seize any sort of national interest, national pride, and/or patriotism as an opportunity to gaslight the country into feeling guilty about its past.
And the race baiters completely ignore the role of their politics and political party in that past.
Nerm,
It became about race when you asked:
I could give you a long list of accomplishments they have made, or point you to colonialism for their plight. Both did affect them and sorry, that is fact and not a dog whistle. I don't do that.
“The race baiters are those who characterize 'take back our country' as a racist dog whistle. The race baiters seize any sort of national interest, national pride, and/or patriotism as an opportunity to gaslight the country into feeling guilty about its past.”
If anyone had any confusion as to how the maga movement has impacted the dialogue, one only look at this quote and understand just how it has infiltrated the narrative.
And no one has answered that question. The current liberal politics has advocated a diminution of national sovereignty and elevation of global interests. But those global interests are dominated by a non-white population.
And those accomplishments are given more attention where the population is not a white majority. The point is that race baiting accusations against the white population have received outsized attention where the white population is in the majority. That's a biased, myopic view of history influenced by racial bigotry against the white majority in those parts of the world.
The white population hasn't been the only colonizers. That's the focus of history in portions of the world with white majorities which only establishes a biased myopic worldview of history. Non-white populations even colonized parts of Europe in the past but that is given short shrift to sustain a dog whistle of blaming the evil white population.
The non-white human population has been around longer than the white population. The non-white human population has been larger throughout history than the white population. So, why has attention been focused on the world's white population?
How is bigotry against the world's white population any different than anti-Semitism? Just blame white people for all the world's problems and advocate racial cleansing as the solution.
“Just blame white people for all the world's problems and advocate racial cleansing as the solution. “
‘White people’ ? Racial cleansing’ ?
Until the time comes when we can finally accept that we have so much more in common than the color of our skin or the sins committed in focusing on such an innocent and insignificant difference, we are doomed to repeat the mistakes that have defined us..,and somehow driven us to believe in the ‘we’ vs. ‘they’ mentality that serves no one and only shames the empowered.
We can be better…if only we could get out of our way.
There might be some more advocating for minorities, but that was before, even as recent as our last century, none of their accomplishment were taught. In fact Nerm, as a white Jewish Indian, I can't remember once in my education when it was taught about anything doing with being Jewish or Indian. Christmas was the only holiday in Dec, and are you going to tell me that Jews have not made accomplishments? Could the Pilgrims have survived without the Indians? Or learned that the willow bark was a pain reliever? It is not against white people (I am white also although my daughters were told in college by some midwestern kids that Jews were not white), but more taking the time to focus a little on other people's accomplishments so that they become educated.
That is true, but the fact that you can ask that question means that the effect of colonization still lingers. Of course white people have made a mark throughout history, but while they were living still in caves in Europe, Asians, East Asians and the ME were making huge advancements.
Because it depends on who is writing the history. Another effect of colonization. Tell me something. If England had beaten us in the Revolutionary War, don't you think that we would have been painted as barbarians? As a person who grew up between here and England I can tell you that as late as the 1980's, we were viewed by the English as uncivilized. And even now, they are unaware of any of our literature. It's thought to be garbage. So Mark Twain, Nathaniel Hawthorne, Robert Frost, and Steinbeck, etc, are all garbage. Does that tell you something about colonial mindset, without making race an issue?
I am not advocating for bigotry against the white population, and I don't think that most liberals are (at least from conversations I have had with them). I think that they just want the truth to come out. That is why we remember the Holocaust.
“There might be some more advocating for minorities,…”
At least they now are afforded a voice after a surviving a past facing actual policies of eradication, subjugation, segregation, and discrimination.
The more they are heard, the sooner we can make it clear we accept our past failures, learn from them, and not repeat them.
Growth…the same thing we taught our children. Time we remember those lessons.
Yes, we most certainly do
Really? Where does the atomic bomb fit into that generalization? Wasn't Albert Einstein of Jewish heritage? Robert Oppenheimer? Enrico Fermi? Edward Teller? A significant number of physicists responsible for developing the atomic bomb were of Jewish heritage. Americans built the atomic bomb; their ethnicity and heritage wasn't that important.
The American mythology of the first Thanksgiving depends upon the inclusion of American Indians. 1620 was far, far more prominent in classroom teaching of history than 1619 when I was in grade school. Long ago and far away, when I was in school, we were taught that the American Indian was the originator of American agriculture.
And Christmas did not become a national holiday in the United States until June 28, 1870. In fact, New Year Day, Independence Day, and Thanksgiving were not national holidays until June 28, 1870. Ulysses S. Grant was President and Republicans controlled both chambers of Congress (if it's necessary to cast blame).
How is that rectified with humans originating in Africa? Since all humans came out of Africa, Africa colonized the entire world. Human migration is a defining characteristic of humans. Yes, it is possible to select a very narrow timeframe to fit any desired narrative. But the facts are that just about every human culture have been colonizers at some point in history.
That the Indians saved the Pilgrims has been the standard narrative for the last hundred years. It's certainly the way I was taught in school.
Yet somehow the ever changing peoples of even The Bronx America are now living in general peace, harmony and ever growing prosperity despite being a cornucopia of peoples who immigrated from all over the world. The same peaceful way things could and should be everywhere. It is the year 2024 for God's sake!
Israel, Ukraine, Lebanon, why not? Peace is not impossible!
The modern world is diverse, mobile and desire the same...
Peace, prosperity and the certainty their people will endure.
Instead of ask how it is possible, demand it is made reality!
Exactly, demand and it will be achieved. What do the Palestinians demand and who speaks for them?
They need representatives like Anwar Sadat and Jimmy Carter!
Exactly, Menachem Begin doesn’t deserve any of the credit.
Is this the Bronx you are talking about?
The United States has certainly fought in a lot of wars. How many of those wars have started in the United States? Maybe the problem is that Americans keep trying to bring peace to a world where the majority does not want peace. The United States is only 330 million out of a population of 7.5 billion. And now that majority worldview is rapidly displacing the majority in the United States. How long before the United States falls apart like the rest of the world?
Crime is up in the Bronx, with a surge in the number of stolen vehicles and a rise in assaults accounting for the increase, according to the latest NYPD data released Nov. 5.
The number of major crimes — including murder, rape, robbery, felony assault, burglary, grand larceny and grand larceny of automobiles — increased 6.4% in the Bronx for the year through Nov. 5, compared to the same period last year. There were 25,267 major crimes reported in the borough for the year through Nov 5, up from 23,749 for the same period in 2022.
Robert Oppenheimer was Jewish, but he had a hard time getting into Harvard and ended up finishing his degree in Germany. Albert Einstein was German and only allowed to enter the US because of his knowledge. Enrico Fermi was Italian and a Catholic. Edward Teller was a Hungarian Jew, who again, went to school in Germany. Do you know why that was? Because most of our best schools had quotas on letting Jews in. That is why Brandies University was founded... so that Jews could go to university, freely.
Nerm, as you must know, I was a teacher for over 20 years and I still have strong ties to the teaching community. None of them teach 1619. At least in NY, it is not considered a recognized curriculum. Now I am aware that some people are trying to push it, but so far it's not there.
You kind of missed my point. It was that growing up in the 1960's, there was no celebration of Hannuaka anywhere... not in the stores, not in school, not on the radio. It was like we were invisible. You not remembering that, does not make it any less true.
I think I said that, Sean. My point was the contributions made by them.
So, the reality is that oppression and victimhood are defining characteristics; accomplishments don't matter. (Also note I mentioned Jewish heritage. Laura (Capon) Fermi was a Jew. That's why Enrico Fermi came to the United States.) The physicists I mentioned are not an exclusive list. There were many other physicists with Jewish heritage involved with developing the bomb. Leo Szilard, Niels Bohr, Lise Meitner, Joseph Rotblat, among others, also played significant roles in development of the bomb.
During the early 20th century most of the best schools were German. Germany was the world's leader in engineering, science, and technical development. That, too, was due to the Jewish influence on European education. Isn't scholarship important within Jewish culture? Isn't that why so many Jews have won Nobel Prizes? Or is oppression and victimhood more important to Jewish heritage than accomplishments? Maybe that explains why history is being taught the way it is. Heritage counts for nothing in the history of human progress and accomplishments.
Do you understand that Santa Claus is not a religious figure? Just because Christ was commercialized doesn't mean the celebration is religious. Marketers tend to advertise to the biggest market to make the most money. If Walmart could make more profit selling plastic menorahs then Hannuaka would receive more commercial attention, too.
Can you imagine what a Democratic women with 5 kids from 3 different husbands would go thru if she ran for POTUS?
They would make her wear a Scarlet A if she had sexual relations with anyone besides her husband, but their perfect candidate has had how many?
Um....I ran out of fingers and toes....
"Next time I tell you someone is unfit to be President, believe me" - The Inimitable Ann Richards of Texas, before it sucked so bad...
How did Ann win Texas 22 years after Nixon’s Southern Strategy?
Has to be an urban legend here somewhere.
The 90’s? It took republicans until 2012 to take the Arkansas legislature, the lying bullshit that the racist became republicans is just that.
Harrison, Arkansas which is known as the most racist town in America voted for Trump 78.9% in the last presidential.
Either a whole lot of Republicans moved to Harrison in the last decade or a lot of Democrats became Republicans.
Here are a couple of billboards in Harrison. The radio one is right on the main highway through town, highway 65
The right wingers on this site are in massive denial about all this.
Denial about what?
Wasn't Arkansas the last South State to go red?
I don’t think that the Repubs took over until 2014 there, almost 50 years after Nixon’s Southern Strategy.
Some (many) Trump voters are the same people who put up those signs in Harrison Arkansas. A place where Trump got almost 80% of the vote in the general election.
Dont bother asking me any more questions.
Explain Nixon's "Southern Strategy" and if it was successful...
And yes, Arkansas was a conservative Democratic state, like much of the South, before it became a conservative Republican state!
You know this.
Similar to FDR’s, but not as successful. In 68, Nixon only won TN, FL, SC, NC and VA.
. In 68, Nixon only won TN, FL, SC, NC and VA.
And then Carter won the entire south in '76 except Va, and Clinton split it in 92 and '96..
Its almost like Republican did well in the south when they did well nationally, and not as well when they didn't. The idea that Nixon somehow changed American politics by winnning a few southern states (like Eisenhower did a dcade before) is silly. The south gradually trended Republican as it grew wealthier and less racist, with Eisenhower the first to break through. Republicans were succesful in the border states and didn't really start winning consistently in the "deep south" until this century.
Nixon won partly by purposely appealing to all the disaffected partyless Dixiecrats. A strategy employed by gop strategist like Lee Atwater and Karl Rove to turn the solidly Democratic South into a Republican stronghold, unto this very day...
This is history you are well aware of but being disingenuous.
A strategy that failed as FDR did much better in the South than Nixon. Isn’t that why he said nice things about Robert E Lee in Dallas in 36 when he unveiled the monument?
You’re spoiling the Dem Urban Legend Sean.
I've seen some billboards up around Mountain Home that all about trmp won the election in 2020. I keep meaning to take photos when I see them....
Wow. That is some extra smelly bullshit.
Nope, a steaming pile of red hot truth. No wonder it offends you!
Not even close
Then you should be able to enunciate exactly how and why...
Blanket denials need not apply. Explain yourself immediately!
1918 pandemic. 1929 depression. 1968 race riots. That is really what you are trying to sell. Bullshit.
Except that, under Trump we did suffer the worst global pandemic since 1918, the worst unemployment rates since the Great Depression and the worst race riots since 1968...
Nixon should have never gone to China
No, it was higher in 1974-76, 1980-85, 1991-92, 2008-12
Race riots? No way, peaceful demonstrations. Miami 1980? LA 1992 Ferguson 2014, Baltimore 2015?
More people died under biden. Unemployment rates that the left caused by shutting everything down. I thought they were mostly peaceful demonstrations. Why don't you tell the truth?
Damn Racist scum