• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

Racism in the Military

Treetop Flyer

Well-Known Member
pilot

Griz882

Frightening children with the Griz-O-Copter!
pilot
Contributor
Nope.



The Voting Rights Act, proposed by members of both parties and signed into law by a Democratic President in 1965. The Civil Rights Act of 1968, proposed by Democrats in Congress and signed into law by a Democratic President. Also Executive Orders 9981 and 8802, issued by Democratic Presidents.

Both parties helped push through much of the legislation in the 60's but President's Kennedy and Johnson were critical in their passage, built on work of their 3 predecessors.



Sure, and the Nixon advisor who helped originate the strategy and popularize the phrase was just talking extemporaneously when he said this:

"From now on, Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote, and they don't need any more than that... but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That's where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats."

Or Lee Atwater, who after saying this in an interview (which was anonymous at the time) ran Ronald Reagan's 1984 campaign and subsequently became the Republican National Chairman.

"Y'all don't quote me on this. You start out in 1954 by saying, "Nigger, nigger, nigger." By 1968 you can't say "nigger"—that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me—because obviously sitting around saying, "We want to cut this," is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than "Nigger, nigger."

If you want it in a book, here's one. Then there is Reagan's "states rights" speech in Mississippi in 1980 a mere 7 miles from where 3 civil rights workers were murdered just 16 years before without a mention of their sacrifice or civil rights at all? Yeah, just a coincidence.

Or maybe one of Atwater's successors as RNC Chairman:

"For the last 40-plus years we had a ‘Southern Strategy’ that alienated many minority voters by focusing on the white male vote in the South."

But sure, all a lie.



But only 18% of the black vote, a high water mark for Republican presidential candidates since then. I wonder why that is?
SNARK! 1980...you needed a speech from 1980. Adding to that I did not use the word lie...I used the word myth.
 
Last edited:

Flash

SEVAL/ECMO
None
Super Moderator
Contributor

More civil war memorials targeted by the woke brownshirts. This time the evil Robert Gould Shaw and the 54th Massachusetts.

Oops?

Stupid people do stupid things, fortunately it has been cleaned up already.

Meanwhile in Prague the Czechs show how to take down statues honoring military folks who were responsible for the subjugation of much of the country's populace, along with quite a few killed along the way too. The Marshal will go to a museum, where he belongs, likely with some context explaining his 'heroic' but bloody history. At least the Russians are on the case, coming to save the day!

26194
 

DanMa1156

Is it baseball season yet?
pilot
Contributor
Sorry, too cryptic! Adams defended the British soldiers (Essentially the police) that were accused of murder after the Boston Massacre. He won the case and was widely despised by the rebels of his time...the Sons of Liberty.
Ah, I thought you might be referencing that. See, it's funny, I see that as a huge strength in his story - he so greatly believed in the right to counsel. Not only did he defend them, he won the case if I recall! Prevented mob rule. Initially lost ~85% of his business I think, per the David McCullough version of Adams.
 

Picaroon

Helos
pilot

More civil war memorials targeted by the woke brownshirts. This time the evil Robert Gould Shaw and the 54th Massachusetts.

Oops?

American citizens are having their actual civil rights violated by government goons daily. You're comparing people tearing down monuments to traitors who started a war because they wanted to subjugate an entire race of people to Nazis.

I'm honestly ashamed by the shit I'm reading in this thread. For the good of the Navy the mods should move this thread to a private forum or delete it because any normal human stumbling upon this is going to see a bunch of Navy officers being racist pieces of shit for 20 something pages.
 

Griz882

Frightening children with the Griz-O-Copter!
pilot
Contributor
American citizens are having their actual civil rights violated by government goons daily. You're comparing people tearing down monuments to traitors who started a war because they wanted to subjugate an entire race of people to Nazis.

I'm honestly ashamed by the shit I'm reading in this thread. For the good of the Navy the mods should move this thread to a private forum or delete it because any normal human stumbling upon this is going to see a bunch of Navy officers being racist pieces of shit for 20 something pages.
Well...you kind of missed a lot in the conversation, but that can happen especially in a thread like this. My question is with your opening line...aren’t you, in holding a commission, just another government goon? Or are you one of the good ones? Just kidding.

As for the racism charge, I would really appreciate you showing me where people in this thread are being racist. Thank you.
 

Treetop Flyer

Well-Known Member
pilot
American citizens are having their actual civil rights violated by government goons daily. You're comparing people tearing down monuments to traitors who started a war because they wanted to subjugate an entire race of people to Nazis.

I'm honestly ashamed by the shit I'm reading in this thread. For the good of the Navy the mods should move this thread to a private forum or delete it because any normal human stumbling upon this is going to see a bunch of Navy officers being racist pieces of shit for 20 something pages.
Vandalizing a monument to black union soldiers sounds a lot like something nazis would do. Thanks for playing. If you’re going to make accusations first make sure you aren’t a dipshit.
 

exNavyOffRec

Well-Known Member
Vandalizing a monument to black union soldiers sounds a lot like something nazis would do. Thanks for playing. If you’re going to make accusations first make sure you aren’t a dipshit.

Unfortunately things are getting damaged just because it is at that location, there have been video's of businesses owned by a variety of minorities that have been damaged by people of every race.

I am sure there are some nazi type people out there doing stuff as well, however people are getting caught up in the moment in some of these violent protest and being indiscriminate
 

wink

War Hoover NFO.
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
It was said above that history would not be errased any time soon. Does 50 years constitue soon? Maybe 100 years. It doesn't have to be rewritten in the history books and on the internet as was mentioned. It begins with the erasing of the remnants of history and the conversations and study they motovate. Stalinist and others during the worst of communist rule controlled history not just in the history books but by erasing faces from photographs and controlling what monuments went up and which came down. What we are seeing is leftism at the extreme. They are beginning to control the language and intimidate people with it by changing the plain meaning of words and phrases. A tweet goes up an oped written, clearly to most people meaning one thing but if the right people, the powerful peopleor threatening people object to it, it comes down. Those Twitter posts, the opeds, books and searches are what ultimately will inform history. It is being stifled even as we speak. I haven't read 1984 since high school. But I am pretty sure controlling the language featured prominently in it. Considering the overarching theme of the book, I am concerned about the direction we are going.
 

taxi1

Well-Known Member
pilot
It was said above that history would not be errased any time soon. Does 50 years constitue soon? Maybe 100 years. It doesn't have to be rewritten in the history books and on the internet as was mentioned. It begins with the erasing of the remnants of history and the conversations and study they motovate. Stalinist and others during the worst of communist rule controlled history not just in the history books but by erasing faces from photographs and controlling what monuments went up and which came down. What we are seeing is leftism at the extreme. They are beginning to control the language and intimidate people with it by changing the plain meaning of words and phrases. A tweet goes up an oped written, clearly to most people meaning one thing but if the right people, the powerful peopleor threatening people object to it, it comes down. Those Twitter posts, the opeds, books and searches are what ultimately will inform history. It is being stifled even as we speak. I haven't read 1984 since high school. But I am pretty sure controlling the language featured prominently in it. Considering the overarching theme of the book, I am concerned about the direction we are going.
So if we take down statues celebrating the leaders who attempted to keep 4,000,000 of their (now acknowledged to be) fellow humans enslaved, we are erasing history?

I think we will continue to remember the Civil War just fine without a statue of Lee.
 

Griz882

Frightening children with the Griz-O-Copter!
pilot
Contributor
So if we take down statues celebrating the leaders who attempted to keep 4,000,000 of their (now acknowledged to be) fellow humans enslaved, we are erasing history?

I think we will continue to remember the Civil War just fine without a statue of Lee.
You are correct. We could do the same without a statue of Lincoln as well. Who the heck needs any physical memory of George Washington or John Adams...we have books. Just imagine all that wasted east coast real estate from Boston to Florida where we preserve battlefields! Why bother...read a book. And don’t get me started on the government waste of “honoring” our war dead with federal cemetery plots on land in Arlington or Los Angles that is worth billions to the causes of the living. That garbage can be read about in books.

I seriously mean it when I say you are correct, and I maintain my belief that cities and states have every right to move public art as long as it is done in accordance with the law. I have ZERO heartache with Richmond removing Lee and the others. But, we need to be smart enough to realize this particular argument isn’t about righting an historic wrong...there are no “wrongs” in history, just actors living in their times. Yes...yes, you are right, there is no need to honor them. But, that isn’t what this is about.

This is about controlling the political narrative. Do you seriously think it will end with a few scabby rebels? I have news for you...

 

Pags

N/A
pilot
To me there's a clear difference between renaming a base or taking down a statue and "erasing history." It's not like Lee is being removed from the history books. Is the histiography of how we understand the events surrounding that history and how it relates to us going to change? Absolutely, because there's more to history then just names and dates. And our understanding of events is static; new sources and data come to light that also change our understanding. But will the Civil War continue to be taught and will the numerous museums still be available to educate those who are interested in seeking it out? Of course. Teaching history and public art are two different things.
 

wink

War Hoover NFO.
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
So if we take down statues celebrating the leaders who attempted to keep 4,000,000 of their (now acknowledged to be) fellow humans enslaved, we are erasing history?

I think we will continue to remember the Civil War just fine without a statue of Lee.
Ahh, but you have just now decided how America has to remember the Civil War (I mean method, inspiration, not actual facts and conclusions). If you have your way, it can't be by visiting a Lee statue and being repulsed, or wondering how a man like him came to make the decisions he did. It can be that even some Back Americans can benefit by viewing the statue and reflect on how far America has come. The conclusion on viewing the statue of Lee does not require one to honor him as a promoter of slavery. Just as likely someone will look at the statue and remember him as the General that got his ass whooped at any number of battles that won the Civil War and ensured abolition of slavery. Makes him a chump. When Charles Barkley was asked about the controversy of removing a confederate statue, he said he had own up around them his entire life and never gave them a thought. Didn't effect him then, doesn't now.

Generally, I don't have much heartburn moving statues to museums. But someone has to decided. I am uncomfortable giving that authority to a single person or government committee. And if you are going to have public art and only certain historic art pieces are actually allowed in public, it transmits a message by the government to the public. And while I might support that message in this circumstance, I may not some years from now when some other statue or monument is removed. Moreover, it is completely logical that anyone "triggered" or disrespected by a confederate statue or monument in public WILL be so if they view it in a museum. Then what, total destruction?
 

Pags

N/A
pilot
I'd also offer that most statues are just big chunks of rock and metal to most people. There are vocal minorities on both sides who see them as either monuments to racism or important reminders of a piece of heritage. If you quietly took down an esoteric statue and replaced it overnight with something similar id imagine it would take a long time before someone noticed. Philly was full of guys on horses, no one knew or cared who most of them were besides Rocky (but he wasn't on a horse).
 

Pags

N/A
pilot
Ahh, but you have just now decided how America has to remember the Civil War (I mean method, inspiration, not actual facts and conclusions). If you have your way, it can't be by visiting a Lee statue and being repulsed, or wondering how a man like him came to make the decisions he did. It can be that even some Back Americans can benefit by viewing the statue and reflect on how far America has come. The conclusion on viewing the statue of Lee does not require one to honor him as a promoter of slavery. Just as likely someone will look at the statue and remember him as the General that got his ass whooped at any number of battles that won the Civil War and ensured abolition of slavery. Makes him a chump. When Charles Barkley was asked about the controversy of removing a confederate statue, he said he had own up around them his entire life and never gave them a thought. Didn't effect him then, doesn't now.

Generally, I don't have much heartburn moving statues to museums. But someone has to decided. I am uncomfortable giving that authority to a single person or government committee. And if you are going to have public art and only certain historic art pieces are actually allowed in public, it transmits a message by the government to the public. And while I might support that message in this circumstance, I may not some years from now when some other statue or monument is removed. Moreover, it is completely logical that anyone "triggered" or disrespected by a confederate statue or monument in public WILL be so if they view it in a museum. Then what, total destruction?
So who gets to decide?
 
Top