Chamblee54

Wrestle With A Pig

Posted in History, Library of Congress, Politics, Race by chamblee54 on November 9, 2019

1a34109x

1a34115x

1a34115za

1a34125z

1a34126x

1a34127z

1a34137z

1a34137za

1a34140z

1a34140zb

1a34140zc

1a34141z

1a34144x

1a34144za


This is a repost from November 9, 2008. This was written after the 2008 election. This election saw a mixed-race man become President. It also had the passage of something called Proposition 8. This was a California ballot initiative banning same sex marriage. Prop 8 was made obsolete by a SCOTUS decision, on June 26, 2015, legalizing same sex marriage.

The fallout from Prop 8 is what this post is about. The links to much of the content here no longer work. What is still true today is the wisdom of an old saying: Never wrestle with a pig. You will get dirty, and the hog will enjoy himself. Pictures today are from The Library of Congress.

This blog battle started with the passage of Proposition 8 in California. PG was not surprised at the result. Nor was he surprised that an estimated 70% of black votors opposed the measure.

Some people in LA had a protest outside a Mormon facility. The Mormon church financed a large chunk of the ad campaign supporting Prop 8. At the rally, according to reports, some protesters expressed their displeasure at black people to some African Americans in attendance. The n-word was heard. (The correspondent to the linked report was not at the rally. He is depending on people telling him what they heard.)

PG first heard of this at a local blog. He left this comment: “Two wrongs do not make a right. The African American Jesus Worship Church has been spewing out hatred of Gays and Lesbians for years. They were a big factor in the passage of proposition 8. This does not justify what allegedly happened at that rally. I say allegedly because I was not there. I take what Jasmyne Cannick says with a grain of salt. While a handful of people shouting the n-word is too much, I can’t help but wonder if it was really as bad as these reports say.” PG thought he would hear more. He was correct.

Mr. Pink (not their real name) has butted heads with PG before. Mr. Pink pulled out the rhetorical artillery on this one. The rally was a “glorified klan rally” with “pink robed cross burners”. There were comments about the “Gay Mafia”, why Prop 8 lost, and a lot of other things. The conversation was on Live-Journal. It is difficult to link to in 2019.

The one comment that caught PG’s eye was “Operation: Blame The Negroes rages on as gay leaders continue to scapegoat blacks for the passing of Prop 8 in California. Among those leading the charge are columnists Andrew Sullivan and Dan Savage.” PG was curious what Mr. Sullivan had said, and who Dan Savage was. The commentary by Mr. Pink did not have links back to the comments by Mr. Sullivan and Mr. Savage. PG went wading through Mr. Sullivan’s blog, which was quite a chore. Andrew Sullivan posts a lot of material. Finally, PG found a reference to a column by Dan Savage. It turns out Mr. Savage writes a sex advice column for a Seattle Gay Newspaper. PG wonders who appointed him a community leader.

PG made a comment, using the name Chamblee54. The first comment listed the links to Mr. Sullivan and Mr. Savage. He added “As for the rally in Westwood, what I am reading sets off my b.s. detector. While shouting race slurs is wrong, I was not at the rally. I have to take the word of the reports on the internet. Frankly, I don’t believe the race baiting at that rally was more than a few fringe performers. I could be wrong, and there is really no way to find out for sure. The point is, you cannot believe everything you read. You should do a bit of research, and not just paste in verbatim from other sources.”

Mr. Pink was not amused. ”First of all, what happened in Westwood has been covered extensively by everyone from Jasmyne Cannick to the Huffington Post. Those people aren’t making up what happened….Fourth of all don’t f*****g tell me about researching my sources just because you don’t want to hear the truth that the gay community is filled with some bottom-feeding bigots. It’s that blind-eye mentality which is why shit is so f****d up now. Next time you tell somebody to do more research, take your own f*****g advice.” He did not offer any more links.

PG replied “If you are going to say that “Among those leading the charge are columnists Andrew Sullivan and Dan Savage,” then you should supply links so we can say what they said.” He also asked for a link to a post at the Huffington Post about the rally in Westwood. PG went looking at the HuffPo, but could not find anything about the rally in Westwood with the race baiting. PG did find a report of a rally in San Diego, where the crowd protested the passage of Prop 8 without apparent incident.

Mr. Pink replied “And once again, still full of fail. Go read Racialicious to read Savage’s bigoted comments blaming black people for the passing of Prop 8. Because we’re all homophobic and we’re all racist…I’ve got the links and I’ve done my research but since you’re so hellbent on defending these bigots regardless, you can look it up yourself as you’re going to believe what you want in spite of what the facts say.” When you lose your cool, you lose the argument.

PG replied ”I am paying you a compliment by paying attention. When you quote someone, or accuse them of “leading the charge”, it is not too much to ask to provide a link so the reader can see for themselves what was said.”

This is no longer about protesters shouting racial slurs at African Americans. He does not doubt that it is possible, while suspecting it was a tiny part of the overall crowd. To PG, the issue is basic journalism. When you say someone is “leading the charge”, you should provide a link to the original comments. The reader can judge what the person says. The reader can also decide whether to get upset, about the musings of a sex advice columnist.

The final reply was by Mr. Pink. He said “fair enough”, and listed a series of links. There was not a link to Huffington Post.

The moral of this story is that you should not believe everything you read. And, when you go telling tales on the internet, it is easy enough to show links to the source of your information. You should do it. If you give a teacher a term paper, you are expected to use footnotes to show where you got your information. When you go posting on your blog, you should use the same standard.

PG condemns the use of racial slurs, including *racist.* PG also condemns the branding of bystanders as bigots, because someone in the same crowd uses a racial slur.

1a33877z

1a33879za

1a33882z

1a33882za

1a33893z

1a33893za

1a33894z

1a33894za

1a34098z

1a34098za

1a34105z

1a34105za

1a34151z

1a34151za

1a34151zb

Whiteness On YouTube

Posted in Georgia History, Library of Congress, Race, Undogegorized by chamblee54 on October 24, 2019



What would happen if you were to type *whiteness* into the youtube search engine? PG hears a lot of talk about whiteness. Almost none of it is positive. Maybe an education is needed. A couple of comments before we start. (1) Only videos lasting less than ten minutes will be considered. Panel discussions lasting seven hours are too much work. (2) While listening to videos without a transcript, it is easy to misunderstand what people say. What is reported here is a good faith representation. (3) There is a lot of talk about whiteness on youtube. Most of it is either boring, or annoying. This feature will try to weed those out. If you want to see more, you are encouraged to type whiteness in the youtube search engine. Pack a lunch. This is a repost.

Franny Choi – Whiteness Walks into a Bar A young lady, of Asian descent, reads from a phone. The poem takes “walks into a bar”, and turns the preacher, priest, and rabbi into whiteness. “whiteness walks into a bar with a golden retriever, the golden retriever promptly takes a (shit) on the floor, the bartender’s like what the, whiteness says whoa-oh-oh-oh, tone, meanwhile the dog is started to run, as the shit’s spraying wet feces everywhere, and whiteness is like, you know if you want me to respect you and your cause you could try being a little less confrontational”

The Expanding Definition of Whiteness This is boring. A black lady talks about how Irish and Italian people were not considered white, until they were. She then moves on to Jews. At 3:23, something “took away the racial taint from Jewishness.” What does the perineum have to do with Jewish whiteness? This performance is neither educational or entertaining.

THE HISTORY OF WHITENESS Kat Blaque is a piece of work. She once went off on PG, who said he did not like the sound of cis-. In this show, Miss Blaque discusses history. She begins by saying that Spanish slave traders invented something called “scientific racism.” This was in the 17th century. The term racism was not used before 1933 In this history based talk, a lot of *facts* are thrown out, in rapid succession and high volume, with a few links for documentation. It is tough to say how much of this chatter is true. What is easy to say is that Miss Blaque does not say what whiteness is, except a system of laws and cultural norms that benefit white people. Whiteness has an elastic definition. It means whatever the speaker wants it to mean.

Everything Wrong With “Whiteness” is a catchy title. Edwins Generation read an article, The Video of the Man Saving the Rabbit From the Fire Captures Everything Wrong With Whiteness in 30 Seconds. EG wondered if the article was satire. Gizmodo websites are often confused for satire. The article is about a man saving a rabbit from a forest fire. “maybe the whitest thing I’ve ever seen.” The battle cry to Examine Your Whiteness just got more complicated.

Jon Hamm ‘White Thoughts’ This is a mock infomercial for a product called “White Be Gone.” WBG will eliminate whiteness from your lifestyle. Is this over the top (under the bottom) white self loathing, or is it a satire? After a while, is it worth worrying about? A response video, How to fight “Whiteness,” takes WBG seriously for 45 minutes.

At 4:23 in “White Thoughts”, a black choir sings behind the talent. Mr. Hamm says that whiteness leads you to wear sheets, and burn crosses. A picture is shown, of a white pride after party in Coweta County, GA. A white peoples march had been planned, and fizzled. A few of the whitebois went to a field, and burned a swastika. The “participation trophy” rally is the picture shown at 4:23.

STEPS TO HEAL YOUR TOXIC WHITENESS is another fake commercial. It refers to a program at Everyday Feminism, Healing From Toxic Whiteness. – 10-Week Program “Learn how to free yourself from toxic whiteness to begin developing an anti-racist white identity. Price $297.” The EF program is promoted by VICE. Want to Heal Yourself from ‘Toxic Whiteness’? This Class Can Help “The people behind the self-help/intersectional feminism publication Everyday Feminism are offering a course that aims to educate people of privilege so “individual people of color don’t have to.”

‘It’s Impossible to Imagine Trump Without the Force of Whiteness’ It is inevitable that we would talk about Donald Trump today. In this video, Ta-Nehisi Coates talks. “…endorse someone who had only whiteness to offer.” PG had to listen to that gem three times, to make sure he got it right. So, all that Donald Trump has to offer is whiteness? Really? Is it the quality of DJT whiteness, or the quantity? After all, most of the other candidates were white. Mr. Trump “ran on whiteness as his sole attribute.” This video is released along with an article, The First White President. The article has lots of zesty quotes about DJT, and whiteness.

The Fire This Time: Claudia Rankine on Whiteness as a Brand This post started out as a good idea, but got boring fast. Thank you for reading to the end. What better way to end this than with Claudia Rankine, whose work is being discussed on this blog. “One of the things that we don’t say explicitly is that whiteness is a brand.” Pictures today are from The Library of Congress.

Ben And Jerry Social Justice Warfare

Posted in Library of Congress, Politics, Race, Undogegorized by chamblee54 on October 13, 2019

8d25445x

8d25446xa

3c25541x

8b32747x

8b32790x

8d25418x

8d25419x


Uncle Hotep recently made a video, Ben & Jerry’s support for #BlackLivesMatter – Uncle Hotep chimes in. It seems like the fudge ice cream packers have a new flavor, Empower Mint™.

PG heard that, and remembered something he heard in church. The youth minister was preaching. America was in rebellion. Did you know that there is a car now, and one of the colors is anti establish mint? PG quit going to church soon after this.

As people familiar with AAVE (African American Vernacular English) know, white people and black people have different ways of pronouncing words. Take harassment. A white person might say huh RAS ment. A black person might say ha ras MINT. Arguably, naming a ice cream flavor Empower Mint™ is making fun of the way black people talk.

Ben and Jerry recently went on the social justice warpath. There was a tweet, and a website post, 7 Ways We Know Systemic Racism Is Real. Quotes were cited, statistics were regurgitated, and B&J boldly stated that america is not post racial. The frozen dessert consumer is encouraged to watch a video, take an implicit bias test, and talk to your kooky uncle.

The makers of Empower Mint™ are famously located in Vermont. According to the census bureau, the estimated population of Vermont is 626,042. This population is White 94.8%, Black 1.3%, Native American 0.4%, Asian 1.6%, mixed 1.9%.

Pictures for this repost are from The Library of Congress. The pictures taken in Daytona Beach, FL, were taken, in February, 1943, by Gordon Parks.

8d25421x

8d25421xa

8d25425x

8d25427x

8d25428x

8d25429x

8d25430x

8d25434x

The Scarlet R

Posted in Library of Congress, Quotes, Race by chamblee54 on October 11, 2019

8b31850x

8b31857x

8b31909x

8b32463x

8b32479x

8b32480x

8b32481x

8b32490xa


Bloggingheads.tv released another chat featuring Glenn Loury and John McWhorter. With election days 35 days away, there was lots of talk about Donald and Hillary. It only took 1:44, in episode 44020, to learn what is expected. The assignment is to call DJT a racist, and lament what a terrible thing that is. This is what passes for political discourse in 2016.

At 3:28, there was an aha moment. The line was that DJT, instead of an orange haired ogre, was really just a seventh grade bully. When PG was in seventh grade, there was a mean person who gave him problems. This individual is now a facebook friend, and regularly posts memes supporting DJT. PG likes to know what the “other side” thinks. Ignoring the memes is always an option.

At 9:22, the importance of identifying racism in others is stressed. This is said to totally justify the appeal of DJT. Once you call someone a racist, you no longer have to work to understand their motives. When the scarlet R is super glued to somebody, that is all you need to know.

The Scarlet Letter is the rip roaring tale of Hester Prynne. She got caught fooling around, and had the scarlet A, for adultery, pinned to her chest. It was pinned to her chest, and she could see who did the pinning. In today’s “woke” world, the scarlet R, for racist, is super glued to the back of the terrible person. The person never knows who gave them this dreaded, irrevocable, label.

At 21:28, John tells an amusing story. He was talking to a well meaning white woman, said to be helpful in selling more books. At some point, the woman felt obligated to say that “we don’t like to talk about race.” John was too polite to laugh in her face.

The truth is, of course, that talking about race is the new national pastime. Does anyone listen? In all that talk, is anything worthwhile said? These questions are considered rude, and probably racist.

At 31:09, John said the n word. It is not known whether it ended with -er, or with -a. Pictures today are from The Library of Congress. This is a repost.

8b32513x

8b32514x

8b32529x

8b32563z

8b32597x

8b38704x

8a21542x

8b31844x

Why Did The 1956 Legislature Change The Flag?

Posted in GSU photo archive, Politics, Race by chamblee54 on October 6, 2019

LBCB011-057ax

LBCB034-083bz

LBCE6-060az

LBCE7-025az

LBGPNS2-171az

LBGPNS2-171aza

LBGPNS2-171azb

LBGPNS3-213az


What Stacey Abrams said about burning the Georgia flag in 1992 The New York Times decided to show a picture of a younger, slimmer Stacey Abrams burning the Georgia state flag. The year was 1992. The state flag had the Confederate battle flag embedded. People were asking the legislature to change that. Miss Abrams was a student activist. This is a repost.

The NYT article sparked a twitter dogpile, about the motives of the Georgia legislature in 1956. PG remembers 1993, when the initial proposal to change the flag was made. Changing The Flag is an account of those years. If you have a minute, you should read that post before going any further. The people who wanted to change the flag introduced an argument. They said that the legislature changed the flag, in 1956, as a protest against integration. PG never believed that. One afternoon in 1994, PG found a newspaper article that supported his point of view. After that, PG did not think much about the issue. The flag was changed in 2000 and 2003.

The issue has a few shades of gray. The reason given in 1956 was honoring the Confederacy. In 1993, the 1956 legislature was said to be protesting integration. The emotions of honoring the Confederacy, and denouncing integration, are not entirely separate. Many of the same people, who are proud of the Confederacy, are white supremacists. To an outsider, they can seem like the same thing. PG can understand how someone not familiar with Georgia could mistake the two.

The debate, over the motive of the 1956 legislature, was never necessary. The flag, featuring the Confederate battle flag, was seen as a symbol of racism. Many people were offended by this flag. Why not just say we should change the flag for this reason, and not worry what the legislature was thinking? However, this was not good enough. People needed some more ammunition for their fight. The notion that the flag was changed as a protest against desegregation was born. PG never heard, before 1993, that the flag was changed as a protest against integration. People believed this notion without any evidence, just because somebody said so. 1994 was 38 years after 1956. Very few people in 1994 were active in 1956. The argument in favor of the changed-to-protest-integration notion had two parts: (1) Because I said so, (2) if you disagree you are a racist idiot.

@KevinMKruse No, she burned the old *Georgia* flag, which had been designed specifically by white supremacists as a show of defiance to desegregation in 1956. Let’s dig in. @chamblee54 The Flag was not changed as a protest against desegregation. Changing The Flag @KevinMKruse I literally wrote a book on this, but congratulations on finding a blog post. @chamblee54 I wrote the blog post. If you read the post, you will see I did research. Did anyone say at the time that the new flag was a protest? Do you have a link to this?

@jdtitan Luther, would you say you’re a racist idiot, or more of a stupid racist? @whoopityscoot Hahahahahahah. I just read your blog post. Sir, you are a moron. @ashleystollar That’s like saying the Civil War wasn’t fought over slavery. @Duranti “emotional pride for the traitors to America” @The_SquidProQuo You found one old newspaper article and felt compelled to argue the point huh? Stupid is a hell of a drug. @theDiff_Kenneth I read your blog post and I would like that 10 minutes of my life back. Your “evidence” was an announcement article that supported the flag change and omitted any overtly racist comments. Your writing style is close to unreadable and your investigative skills do not exist. @kingbuzz0 If you ever find yourself in the position of arguing of (insert subject) in the South had nothing to do with (insert stand in for outright racism), you have a bad argument. It’s all racism, always, every time.

@JoshCStephenso You found a single article? Maybe you would trust a paper written by the Deputy Director of the Georgia Senate Research Office – a chamber that is majority R? This tweet was helpful. The report was written in 2000, before the a new flag was driven through the legislature. If you have the time to read the complete report, it is worth your time. If not, a few quotes will be posted here, along with a few helpful comments.

The first Confederate flag looked a great deal like the Union flag. In early battles of the war, the two flags were often confused. “The commanding Confederate officer at the Battle of Bull Run, General P.T.G. Beauregard, determined that a single distinct battle flag was needed for the entire Confederate army. Confederate Congressman William Porcher Miles recommended a design incorporating St. Andrew’s Cross.”… “The St. Andrew’s Cross – the flag’s distinctive feature – had its origin in the flag of Scotland, which King James I of England combined with St. George’s Cross to form the Union Flag of Great Britain. It is believed that St. Andrew, the patron saint of Scotland since A.D. 750. and brother of the apostle Peter, was crucified by his persecutors upon a cross in the shape of an “X” in A.D. 60. White southerners, many of whom traced their ancestry to Scotland, very easily related to this Christian symbol.” “Other flags such as State regimental colors were used by the Confederacy on the battlefield, but the battle flag, although it was never officially recognized by the Confederate government, came to represent the Confederate army.”

At first, use of the battle flag was restricted to historic events. It wasn’t until the fifties that the flag began to be used by those who fought integration. In 1954, Brown vs. Board of Education was handed down by the Supreme Court, ordering the integration of schools. The Georgia legislature went into resistance mode, and spent a lot of time denouncing integration. The senate research office devotes page after page to these efforts. Finally, “In early 1955, John Sammons Bell, chairman of the State Democratic Party … suggested a new state flag for Georgia that would incorporate the Confederate Battle Flag. At the 1956 session of the General Assembly, state senators Jefferson Lee Davis and Willis Harden introduced Senate Bill 98 to change the state flag. Signed into law on February 13, 1956, the bill became effective the following July 1.”

“Little information exists as to why the flag was changed, there is no written record of what was said on the Senate and House floors or in committee and Georgia does not include a statement of legislative intent when a bill is introduced – SB 98 simply makes reference to the “Battle Flag of the Confederacy.” … “Many defenders of the flag, including former governor Ernest Vandiver, who served as the Lieutenant Governor in 1956, have attempted to refute the belief that the battle flag was added in defiance of the Supreme Court rulings. Vandiver, in a letter to the Atlanta Constitution, insisted that the discussion on the bill centered around the coming centennial of the Civil War and that the flag was meant to be a memorial to the bravery, fortitude and courage of the men who fought and died on the battlefield for the Confederacy.”

This is where it gets murky. It is apparent that the legislature was obsessed with integration. The circumstantial evidence, of the flag being changed as a protest of integration, is there. However, there is no smoking gun. There are no apparent statements, from 1956, saying that this change was made to protest integration. This detail seems to have sprung up in 1993, without having been widely mentioned in the 37 years since 1956. The newspaper article PG found does not mention a protest against integration, and does mention a desire to honor the Confederacy.

“The argument that the flag was changed in 1956 in preparation for the approaching Civil War centennial appears to be a retrospective or after-the-fact argument. In other words, no one in 1956, including the flag’s sponsors, claimed that the change was in anticipation of the coming anniversary. Those who subscribe to this argument have adopted it long after the flag had been changed.” This is contradicted by the newspaper article, and statements by “Governor Griffin’s floor leader, Representative Denmark Groover … “anything we in Georgia can do to preserve the memory of the Confederacy is a step forward.” As for the after-the-fact argument, you could say the same thing about the notion that the flag was changed as a protest against integration.

“There was also some opposition to the change from the state’s many newspapers. The North Georgia Tribune argued that: “….There is little wisdom in a state taking an official action which would incite its people to lose patriotism in the U.S.A. or cast a doubt on that part of the Pledge of Allegiance which says ‘one nation, unto God, indivisible…’ So far as we are concerned, the old flag is good enough. We dislike the spirit which hatched out the new flag, and we don’t believe Robert E. Lee…would like it either” “The Atlanta Constitution also thought that the flag change was unnecessary for the simple fact that “there has been no recorded dissatisfaction with the present flag.” The newspaper article PG found in 1994 was from the Constitution. Even though they were opposed to the change, they did not attribute this change to a desire to protest integration.

“When the flag change was first proposed, it received resistance from groups that one would think would have highly favored the change – various Confederate organizations including the United Daughters of the Confederacy (UDC). “They made the change strictly against the wishes of UDC chapters from all the states that form our organization,” said Ms. Forrest E. Kibler, legislative chairwoman of the Georgia UDC. … The Executive Board of the Georgia Division of UDC had passed a resolution on January 11, 1956 opposing the proposed changes to the flag, citing that the Confederate battle flag belonged to all the Confederate States – not merely to Georgia – and placing it on the Georgia flag would cause strife. … Also opposing the new flag was the John B. Gordon Camp of the Sons of Confederate Veterans. This group protested against all uses of the battle flag except in commemoration of the Confederacy, or by the official use of the Daughters of the Confederacy, the Sons of the Confederacy, and the Children of the Confederacy.” This opposition was touched on in the newspaper article. This is one of the more confusing aspects of this affair.

“While many questioned the political and philosophical motives of the flag change, there were others who considered the change to be an unnecessary expense that would burden taxpayers, since Georgia law required every public school, and all public institutions to fly the state flag. In voting “no,” Representative Mackay said that the present flag was “a symbol of sacred memory” and that “the change puts every flag owner in Georgia to unnecessary expense.” Alleviating the financial concerns of many, sponsors of the bill pointed out that those institutions required to fly the new flag will replace the old flag with the new one only as present flags wear out. Questions were also raised on whether anyone had a copyright on the flag design which would entitle them to royalties – a charge denied by John Sammons Bell and Representative Groover.”

John Sammons Bell is a name that keeps coming up. From 1954 to 1960, Mr. Bell was Chairman of the State’s Democratic Party. He was, by all accounts, an enthusiastic segregationist. One of the jaw dropping moments in the senate report was this: “Bell, a one-time supporter of Governor Ellis Arnall, once had the reputation of being a “liberal” on race issues.”

When the state senate report was issued, in 2000 (6 years after PG found the newspaper article, and dropped out of the argument,) Mr. Bell had a few comments. “He wanted to forever perpetuate the memory of the Confederate soldier who fought and died for his state and that the purpose of the change was “to honor our ancestors who fought and died and who have been so much maligned.” He has also argued that the flag was not redesigned in reaction to and in defiance of the 1954 Brown decision… “Absolutely nothing could be further from the truth … every bit of it is untrue. ”

“On March 9, 1993, (Denmark) Groover moved many Georgians when he stood in the House well to address his colleagues on the subject of the state flag. In an emotional speech, he acknowledged that the flag is offensive to some and conceded that, “I cannot say to you that I personally was in no way motivated by a desire to defy. I can say in all honesty that my willingness was in large part because … that flag symbolized a willingness of a people to sacrifice their all for their beliefs.” Mr. Groover offered a compromise, which included a smaller version of the battle flag. A flag similar to that was adopted in 2000, only to be changed again in 2003.

To sum up, the Georgia state flag was changed in 1956. The new flag contained the Confederate battle flag. Many people were offended by the 1956 flag. PG thought it was ugly. Many others saw it, with some justification, as a symbol of racism. For some reason, speculation about the motives of the 1956 legislature. 18 years after the passage of a new flag, people are still arguing over the motives of the 1956 legislature. Pictures for this gratuitous waste of bandwidth are from “The Special Collections and Archives, Georgia State University Library”. .
LBP31-103bz

LBPE1-031bz

LBPE2-051cz

LBSCB17-094bz

LBT21-164az

LBSCB17-128bz

LBSCE5-86dz

LBSGP1-001az

LBT22-190az

The Gift Of Cultural Appropriation

Posted in Library of Congress, Politics, Race, Undogegorized by chamblee54 on August 25, 2019

14683x

31527xa

31528x

33271xc

33271xd

01948xa

11305xb

13994x


This is a repost from 2015. There is a tasteful video on the innertubes today, WTF is Cultural Appropriation. This is not about WTF Podcast. Hopefully Marc Maron will not wear his hair in dreadlocks. The video shows a black man, jumping around in front of the camera, sharing his ideas about cultural appropriation.

Perhaps we should summarize what ‏@the1janitor has to say. He does not give a shit what people do with their hair. (Does he gift wrap the shit when he does give it?) T1J is not concerned over whether Iggy Azalea sings rap songs. Most culture today is a mix of influences, and T1J is cool with that. This chill does not extend to a pro football team in Hyattsville MD, whose nickname rhymes with munchkins. T1J, aka Kevin Peterson, does not think that is appropriate.

T1J wears dreadlocks. Many Amerikans see this hairstyle as connected to the Rastafarians in Jamaica. T1J is not a rasta, but is not accused of any appropriative wrongdoing by wearing his hair in dreadlocks. It seems the reason for this acceptance is his African American origin.

This is similar to the situation with BHO. The half white POTUS was raised by white people in Hawaii and Indonesia. And yet, because he has dark skin, BHO is unquestioningly accepted as a black man. The POTUS uses the style of black culture that he learned as an adult. When a white fool shoots up a black church, BHO goes to a funeral, sings “Amazing Grace,” and is praised.

Many of these cultural and racial debates are very shallow. Judgements are made on outside appearances, rather than the real person under the skin. The dream of people not “judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character” has turned into a nightmare of petty wrangling over white privilege and cultural appropriation.

So much for content. What caught PG’s eye was the background. There is a Crimson Tide poster on the wall, behind the speaker, that seemed familiar. PG has seen T1J before, in a video titled Why I Disagree With Morgan Freeman. T1J says we need to talk about racism, then talk some more, and then talk more after that. The word listen is not used as often.

The University of Alabama football team poster is an ironic touch. NCAA football teams are highly exploitative of young people. The young men who play work long hours for their education. Many of the football players are rushed through school, taking easy classes so they will be eligible to play. Many of these young men will suffer crippling injuries playing a contact sport. Meanwhile, these football programs are hugely profitable for the institution, especially at a football factory like the University of Alabama. Pictures today are from The Library of Congress. The men in the seven photographs below were members of The Tuskegee Airmen

13256x

13258x

13259x

13260xa

13260xb

13261xm

13262x

Thursday Racial Polemic

Posted in Library of Congress, Quotes, Race, Undogegorized by chamblee54 on August 22, 2019

27306x

27307x

27308a

27308xa


PG was spending a productive sunday morning. He created a map to the Living Walls grafitti festival. He was in a good mood. Even this link on facebook did not bring our slack blogger down.

Out of a masochistic sense of fairness, PG took a look at the link after he finished the map. “That’s Racist Against White People!” A Discussion on Power and Privilege is the usual headache producing polemic. Here is the third paragraph.

“These are White folks who are claiming that the Obamacare tax on tanning beds is “racist” against White people. These are White folks who are claiming that affirmative action is racist against them. These are the White folks who honestly believe they suffer more racism than people of Color.”

Lets take a look at those three links. In the first, Republican Congressman Ted Yoho complained to John Boehner about what is sometimes called the “Snooki tax”. The second link, about affirmative action, is linked to a feminist blog. The money quote “Ask any White person how they feel about Affirmative Action, and you’re almost guaranteed to hear that it is “racist against White people” and that it is “unfair” or “reverse discrimination” and that they oppose it.” This article is used as a source for the comment “These are White folks who are claiming that affirmative action is racist against them.” Is it prejudice to say “ask any white person”?

The last one, about PWOC thinking they suffer more discrimination than POC, is linked to an article in a British tabloid newspaper. Somebody did a study once, and that was one of the results. The study also showed “Blacks also perceived that racism against themselves had steeply declined from 9.7 in the 1950s to 6.1 in the 90s.”

One of the main points in the Everyday Feminism post was that the word racist is often misused. PG will not argue against that. The article was posted two days before a curious tweet by Chris Brown. “N**** done 6 months community service wit police and the DA racist ass crying to the judge that I didn’t do it. Fuck the SYSTEM! “

The entertainer, who is a POC, got in trouble for publicly beating up his girlfriend. He has had problems with his community service requirement. The amusing thing about this tweet is that the “DA racist ass” is a POC.

This is a repost. Very few things needed to be changed. Pictures today are from The Library of Congress. These images are Union soldiers from the War Between the States. The primary justification for that gruesome conflict was the abolition of slavery.

27309x

27301x

27302x

27303x

27305x

Racism Double Feature

Posted in Georgia History, GSU photo archive, Library of Congress, Quotes, Race by chamblee54 on August 17, 2019


There was a comment thread on facebook. Here is the comment that started it. “I have a Facebook friend, who is a black Trump supporter, who says he doesn’t care “if he’s racist or not.” I don’t know what to think about that. Maybe there are a few of my black friends who can help me with that?” There were a lot of comments, which is not surprising. Race, and not liking Donald Trump, are two popular topics of conversation.

The conversation started with a link to When Someone Says They Still Support Trump, I Instantly Know 6 Things About Them. The six items, with a parenthetical summary, are: 1. You want to be ruled, not governed (authoritarianism,) 2. You are not someone I would trust to do business with (business ethics,) 3. You’re either a racist or an enabler of racists (racism,) 4. You have issues with women (misogyny,) 5. You aren’t quite as “Christian” as you claim to be (religious exploitation,) 6. You are anti-constitution (respect for rule of law,)

While those six items are more or less true about Mr. Trump, it is a stretch to say they apply to anyone who supports the man. (Many of these character traits are present in people who don’t like Mr. Trump, especially authoritarianism.) What is disturbing to PG is the way that racial attitudes dominates the conversation. This is a problem in a lot of ways. The obsession with screaming racist helped Mr. Trump get elected. Insulting potential voters is not a good campaign strategy.

There seems to be a national verdict that Donald J. Trump is a racist. A non compliant racial attitude is worse than authoritarianism, crookedness, and mental instability. If you are white, and you question this orthodoxy, then you are a racist. If you are black, and don’t believe without question, then you are asking to be insulted.

The Trump-is-racist meme follows a cynical decision to make Mr. Trump’s racial attitudes a campaign issue. The best evidence cited is a 1973 complaint, involving discrimination in renting apartments. Other evidence… attacks on nationalities, attacks on religious groups, support of unseemly white people … utilize an elastic definition of racism. Others disagree.

There was a comment: Martin C Ezeonu “Lol… I don’t like Trump cuz he is an asshole. On the other hand we know exactly where there country stands now because of him. This country is still racist as hell. these past years nobody addressed is just politicians smartly covering it up. But now to move forward something has to give. And I like that. Let people stop being deceived. Don’t care if he is racist or not I like the fact that he is not a politician and couldn’t play the game. That’s why both parties want him out.”

Mr. Ezeonu is from Nigeria. He might have little in common with most African Americans, other that his skin tone. That is all many people see. People fail to appreciate the amazing diversity in today’s African America. In the comments, Mr. Exeonu was called an idiot, mentally ill, and many other things. Not agreeing with a national consensus is dangerous.

Mr. Trump has numerous problems. In the list of six things, we see authoritarian tendencies, and ethical shortcomings. Many feel the Democrats made a mistake by screaming racist, instead of focusing on his shady business practices. Many white people were alienated by this campaign tactic. After the Trump victory, many black people feel alienated by his election. The race situation gets worse and worse. Saying that Donald Trump is a racist does not help.

Pictures today are from The Library of Congress. This is a repost.

LBCB001-013az

LBCB001-071az

LBCB012-147az

LBCB029-003az

LBCB092-019bz

LBCB092-019bza

LBCB093-064bz

LBCB093-064cz


One of the touted TED talks in the weekly email is Color blind or color brave? It is by Mellody Hobson, a POC in the investment business. It is the standard call to talk more about race. Talk, talk, talk, and talk some more. The word listen is not used.

At the 3:13 mark, Mrs. Hobson makes a remarkable statement. “Now I know there are people out there who will say that the election of Barack Obama meant that it was the end of racial discrimination for all eternity, right?” (Yes, this is a TED talk.) It is possible that someone has said that. There are also people who say the earth is flat.

PG asked Mr. Google about this. The top two results are about the TED talk. The third result is an article in Forbes magazine, Racism In America Is Over. It is written by John McWhorter, one of the “black guys at Bloggingheads.tv.” Dr. McWhorter does say racism is over, sort of. The problems that remain are a lot worse. Too much food for thought, for a population with intellectual bulimia.

There is a quote in the Forbes article that is pure gold.
“When decrying racism opens no door and teaches no skill, it becomes a schoolroom tattletale affair. It is unworthy of all of us: “He’s just a racist” intoned like “nyah nyah nyah nyah nyah!””
There are a lot more results. PG is getting tired of looking. If you want to see for yourself, google “the election of Barack Obama meant that it was the end of racial discrimination for all eternity.” Except for a rogue title editor at Forbes, almost nobody has said that. This is a repost. Pictures today are from “The Special Collections and Archives, Georgia State University Library”.

N03-038_az

N05-030_az

N05-030_bz

N05-030_cz

N05-122_az

N29-139_az

N30-184_az

N31-216_az

Michael Donald

Posted in History, Library of Congress, Race by chamblee54 on August 7, 2019


PG was looking at facebook, minding his own business. Then he saw something he could not unsee.(TRIGGER WARNING) The NSFW image showed a dead black man hanging in a tree. You can see his face. The caption: “Fox News commentator and Trump sycophant Tucker Carlson said yesterday that “white supremacy is a hoax.” I wonder if this poor man would agree? (I apologize if the image offends but sometimes right-wing idiots have to have reality stare them in the face.)”

The gut level reaction was that of being violated. What gives a facebook “friend” the right to shove a gruesome image in the viewers face? A lot more than “right-wing idiots” will see this picture. We understand that a Fox-boi said something you don’t like. That does not give you the right to disturb the community peace of mind.

There are plenty of arguments you can make. You can post your two-wrongs-make-a-right all day long. No doubt _______ did something terrible last week. That does not give you the right to post an obscene picture on facebook. UPDATE: The image has been *hidden* by facebook.

White Supremacy® is an expression that grows by leaps and bounds. It used to mean the kkk, and other hard-core racists. Now, it means whatever you want it to mean. The definition of WS has expanded to the point where the term is meaningless. It is tough to say what, if anything, Tarlson Cucker meant. We would be better off using the phrase White Supremacy® a lot less frequently.

When you are collateral damage on facebook, you have a few options. You can unfriend the perp, and say rude things about them behind their back. This has always seemed petty and childish. Another thing you can do is research the picture. PG did a google images search of the picture. It turns out to be a powerful story. Is it proper to appropriate this image to shame Tarlson Cucker? As if he would know it happened, or care.

Michael Donald is the man hanging in the tree. Here is the story of how he got there. “That week, a jury had been struggling to reach a verdict in the case of a black man accused of murdering a white policeman. The killing had occurred in Birmingham, but the trial had been moved to Mobile. To (Bennie) Hays — the second-highest Klan official in Alabama — and his fellow members of Unit 900 of the United Klans, the presence of blacks on the jury meant that a guilty man would go free. … Hays had said that Wednesday, ”If a black man can get away with killing a white man, we ought to be able to get away with killing a black man.””

“On Friday night, after the jurors announced they couldn’t reach a verdict, the Klansmen got together in a house Bennie Hays owned on Herndon Avenue. According to later testimony from James (Tiger) Knowles, then 17 years old, Tiger produced a borrowed pistol. Henry Francis Hays, Bennie’s 26-year-old son, took out a rope. Then the two got in Henry’s car and went hunting for a black man.”

“Michael Donald was alone, walking home, when Knowles and Hays spotted him. They pulled over, asked him for directions to a nightclub, then pointed the gun at him and ordered him to get in. They drove to the next county. When they stopped, Michael begged them not to kill him, then tried to escape. Henry Hays and Knowles chased him, caught him, hit him with a tree limb more than a hundred times, and, when he was no longer moving, wrapped the rope around his neck. Henry Hays shoved his boot in Michael’s face and pulled on the rope. For good measure, they cut his throat. … Henry Hays and Knowles returned to the party at Bennie Hays’s house, where they showed off their handiwork, and, looping the rope over a camphor tree, raised Michael’s body just high enough so it would swing.” For a while, it looked like the case would go unsolved.

Some people kept looking. “After hearing a lot of lies and following many unproductive leads, (Thomas H.) Figures and (James) Bodman uncovered one key fact: On the night of the murder, Tiger Knowles had returned to Bennie Hays’s house with blood on his shirt. With this new evidence, the Justice Department convened an investigative grand jury in Mobile. Incredibly, the Klansmen called to testify did not bring lawyers with them. In short order, one witness told the grand jury that young Henry Hays had admitted everything to him. This got back to Tiger Knowles, who began to worry that Henry Hays would confess — and, by trading testimony against Knowles for a reduced sentence, leave him bearing the greater burden of guilt.”

“In June of 1983, Knowles confessed to F.B.I. agent Bodman. After pleading guilty to violating Michael Donald’s civil rights, he was placed in the Federal witness protection program — a fairly standard accommodation for Klan informers — and sentenced to life in prison. In December, when Henry Hays was tried for capital murder, Knowles appeared as a prosecution witness.”

Henry Hays was found guilty. “Hays was executed in Alabama electric chair Yellow Mama after Governor Fob James refused to commute his sentence. He was the first white person executed for murder of a black in Alabama since 1913.” Mr. Hays died June 6, 1997.

“Donald’s mother, Beulah Mae Donald, in assistance of SPLC, sued United Klans of America in a civil suit. An all White jury found the Klan responsible for the lynching of Michael Donald and ordered it to pay 7 million dollars. This resulted in the Klan having to hand over all its assets including its national headquarters in Tuscaloosa.”

Pictures today are from The Library of Congress.

Nappy Hair Where?

Posted in GSU photo archive, Race, The English Language, Undogegorized by chamblee54 on July 28, 2019





This is a repost from 2011. A link about white privilege now directs to The Story Behind ‘Alice’s Restaurant’ – the 50-Year-Old Song that Is Forever Young. Pictures are from “The Special Collections and Archives, Georgia State University Library”.
PG was reading facebook, minding his own business, when he saw something that made his head explode. It started with a post with the splashy title White Liberals Have White Privilege Too! . There is something about online discussions about white privilege that make well meaning people want to type a lot of words into little boxes on the monitor. PG usually avoids such a conversation, as if it were an amway pitch, but made an exception this fateful afternoon.

The seminal article was written in 2007, and mentioned the media controversy of the day. It seemed as though Joe Biden said
“I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy … I mean, that’s a storybook, man.” Mr. Biden is currently the Vice President, serving under the FMAA.
There was a link to a bit of archaic html called ” Black People Love Us!, which tells the story of Sally and Johnny…
“We are well-liked by Black people so we’re psyched (since lots of Black people don’t like lots of White people)!! We thought it’d be cool to honor our exceptional status with a ROCKIN’ domain name and a killer website!!” The fun starts when a facebook paster quoted a letter to BPLU.
“I swear, if one more white person says that they want to touch my hair, I am gonna puck a f*ckin mousetrap in it so their f*ckin hand gets caught in it. anyways… GET WITH THE PROGRAM! Have any of you ever heard of sarcasm? Irony? Satires? Canterbury Tales? Shakespeare’s “As You Like it” and “Much Ado About Nothing?” If some of you would actually get your heads out of your asses for one second and read a f*cking book or get educated, you will see that this website is NOT trying to break down PEOPLE, but break down BARRIERS and erase STEREOTYPES…With much love for Sally and Johnny… A Black University of Michigan Student with nappy-ass hair”.

The resulting visual ruined the day for PG. BUMS should keep their pants on, and not burden the world with the sight of nappy hair on their posterior. The same thing goes for any asian, latino, caucasian, native american, or zorlack with this problem.





PG was recently reading a list of rules for writing. He began to think of a few. A wordpad was opened, and before long 18 suggestions appeared. Many are only marginally about writing.

When you publish a list like this, you are placing a target on your back, with the word hypocrite written above. PG does not claim to take all these suggestions all the time. What follows is a goal to work for, not a script for a situation comedy.

When in doubt, shut up.
A halo is best worn over one ear.

If you want to be forgiven, forgive. If you want to be understood, understand.

There are few situations that cannot be made worse with anger and loud talk.

You have two ears and one mouth. Listen twice as much as you talk.

A douche is a hygiene appliance. The verb form refers to using this device, for cleaning purposes. Neither the noun nor the verb is appropriate for use as an insult.

A sentence has one period, placed at the end. Do not place a period after every word to make a point. You should find another way to show emphasis.

Not everyone enjoys the sound of your voice as much as you do.

Do not place “ass” between and adjective and the object. “Ass” is a noun that refers to either a donkey or a butt. An adverb is used to modify an adjective, and is placed before the adjective. Using “ass” as a misplaced adverb is improper. This applies to “a$$”as well.

Before you “call out” somebody for “racism”, drape a towel over your mirror.

The third commandment says to not use the word G-d “in vain”. The G word should only be used for worship and respectful discussion. Improper uses include expressing anger, swearing to, selling life insurance, and pledging allegiance to a nationalist symbol.





Racially Motivated

Posted in Library of Congress, Race, The English Language by chamblee54 on July 19, 2019


A post on chamblee54 examined the local custom of changing street names. Towards the end, there was this sentence: “Some of these changes are racially motivated, while others are not. Some make sense, while most do not.” If you were to say this out loud, chances are good that someone would interrupt you, and say “Why don’t you say racist?

The AP style guide took up this issue earlier this year. Here is what they say: @APStylebook “Do not use racially charged or similar terms as euphemisms for racist or racism when the latter terms are truly applicable.” @APStylebook “The terms racism and racist can be used in broad references or in quotations to describe the hatred of a race, or assertion of the superiority of one race over others. Our new race-related coverage entry on Stylebook Online offers details on when and how to use the terms.” You have to pay for the Stylebook online. G-d is in the details, and hiding behind a paywall.

@AnApeInKhakis “Remove nuance from journalism. If water’s not frozen, it’s boiling.” @beautypill “Yes, for example “You’re missing the point” and “You should go fuck yourself” both apply here, but critical differences in tone guide which one I should use to address your tweet.”

@Zigmanfreud “Yeah, the HUGE problem with this AP stylebook decision is that the people making the judgment call on what is “racist or racism” are so liberal & so PC that anything short of a white person apologizing for being born white (especially if they are a conservative man) would qualify”

@EvanDonovan “Yes, but when are they truly acceptable? Increasingly, newsrooms want attribution when that word is used. “Xxxxx has been under fire since making controversial comments last week. Yyyyy called those comments racist….”

This quotefest could go on all day. If you want to explore the racially/racist rabbit hole, go to an internet near you. More to the point, is changing a street name racially motivated, or racist? This statement applied to multiple street name changes. Often, race was not an apparent factor. We don’t know when the changes took place, or what government body made the changes.

Is this institutional oppression, or just government nonsense? Changing the street name is typical of the petty, separate-water-fountains nature of Jim Crow. Is the water boiling, or is it not frozen? At some point, the writer needs to think for them self. Pictures today are from The Library of Congress.

James Baldwin And The Six Letter Word

Posted in Library of Congress, Quotes, Race by chamblee54 on July 13, 2019






In the spring of 1963, KQED filmed a show, “Take this hammer”, about James Baldwin. The snippet in the video above seems to have been the last three minutes of the show. Here is a transcript. Mr. Baldwin discusses a six letter insult. The n-word is more about the speaker, than the spoken of. A 2010 blogger had this to say.

What resonated with me about this particular video though, is the universal experience we’ve all had being referred to, thought of as, or called something we inherently are not. Not because of something we’ve done, mind you – but because of the way others “interpret” us. Those of us that “transgress” gender norms are often given titles and names that don’t fit who we are – but are more representative of the fears and desires of others. I’ve often felt that people’s projections of me are oftentimes just that – their projections. However, Baldwin’s ending sums up a solution to this perfectly: “But you still think, I gather, that the n****r is necessary. Well he’s unnecessary to me – he must be necessary to you. Well, I’m going to give your problem back to you…you’re the n****r, baby…not me.”

It is now 2019. (All discussions of race must mention the year.) The TV show was fifty sixr years ago. A few things have changed. To many white people, overt expressions of racism are seen as bad manners. The n-word is taboo in polite company. The overall attitudes may not have changed, but most white people are careful how they say things.

This is a repost. Pictures are from The Library of Congress. These men are Union soldiers, from the War Between the States.





A few weeks ago, this blog published a feature, James Baldwin And The Six Letter Word. At the center was selection of James Baldwin talking about the n word. There was a transcript available, which makes today’s exercise a lot easier.

Mr. Baldwin was discussing this nasty word, and offered an insight into who the user of this nasty word was really talking about. Now, there is another nasty word being casually tossed about these days. This other nasty word is racist. What would happen if you took Mr. Baldwin’s talk, and substituted racist for nasty? It is an interesting way to look at things. What follows is not a perfect fit, and may be offensive to some. A few times, it is very close to the truth.

Who is the racist? Well i know this…and anybody who has tried to live knows this. What you say about somebody else (you know) anybody else, reveals you. What I think of you as being is dictated by my own necessities, my own psychology, my own uhm fears…and desires. I’m not describing you when I talk about you…I’m describing me.

Now, here in this country we got somebody called a racist. It doesn’t in such terms, I beg you to remark, exist in any other country in the world. We have invented the racist. I didn’t invent him, white people invented him. I’ve always known, I had to know by the time I was seventeen years old, what you were describing was not me and what you were afraid of was not me. It had to be something else. You had invented it so it had to be something you were afraid of and you invested me with it.

Now if that’s so, no matter what you’ve done to me I can say to you this, and I mean it…I know you can’t do any more and I’ve got nothing to lose…and I know and I have always known you know and really always..…I have always known that I am not a racist…but if I am not the racist…and if it is true that your invention reveals you…then who is the racist?

I am not the victim here. I know one thing from another. I know that I was born, am gonna suffer and gonna die. And the only way that you can get through life is to know the worst things about it. I know that a person is more important than anything else. Anything else.

I’ve learned this because I’ve had to learn it. But you still think, I gather, that the racist is necessary. Well he’s not necessary to me, so he must be necessary to you. So I give you your problem back. You’re the racist baby, it isn’t me.