Jump to content

Happy Juneteenth!


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 116 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Innula Zenovka said:

Of course it should be celebrated.  It's my birthday.

I'm all for it.  I want 52 holidays so we have four day work weeks even before adjusting for vacation and sick leave (for those lucky enough to have such things).

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Desiree Moonwinder said:

The boys of my generation were sent to get shot up in Vietnam for no apparent reason other than to discipline us for otherwise enjoying life and having a good time. 

I'm not sure what "Independence Day" to pin-on, but the Independence Era for me was when the draft ended (date is complicated https://www.sss.gov/history-and-records/vietnam-lotteries/) and pulled out of Vietnam (April 1975). 

All I could tell was that the old people wanted to send the young people off to Vietnam for disciplinary purposes.  We were otherwise having a good time, and they didn't like that yet we we of legal age and they couldn't spank us.  So, they invented some pretext to draft the boys and send them off to die for no good reason. 

While that war was another of the US's big screw-ups in our history, it had absolutely nothing to do with sending young folk off to war just to keep them from having a good time or to discipline them.  

This thinking is another reason that ALL of our history needs to be taught and shown in a factual manner, with all aspects (the good, the bad & the ugly) shown equally, without prejudice or bias.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Paul Hexem said:
13 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

Just had to requote this. It's hard to believe there is an insane movement in the U.S. to prevent children from learning about racism.

I'd like to think it's because we should learn about history- all of it- regardless of singling out certain types of people. 

By teaching Black History too we aren't singling out certain types of people -- we are now attempting to include them in the teachings of history that previously left out their experience.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Paul Hexem said:

I'll always have trouble agreeing with the concept that prioritizing race somehow reduces racism. We should be teaching history, including all the good and bad and why it's good or bad, not literally segregating specific parts of it.

Again, the goal is not to prioritize race or segregate certain parts of history -- the goal is to include what has been forgotten or minimized.

Much of the history of women and people of color simply was not deemed important enough to include previously, if it was even known. There is an attempt to remedy the omission now and include all people who were part of our history. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Alwin Alcott said:
14 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

Please stop it..  This is an important moment for Black people in America, and for the country. 

Not to stirr this thread up, it's sometimes OK to talk about subjects taken differently by others. But don't lecture for things you also never do... going on going on and going on.

And many replies here show again, the main problem is the USA system, all is swept under the carpets. A system we never had and for that the movements from last years have brought nothing new to many other countries.
You got teached with a seperation, we didn't. Stop blaming moderate opinions as bad or against. Many european countries are 40 years ahead of you.

Really not quite sure what you're going on about here, but I have no problem with more moderate opinions on these issues.

I requested that Paul stop politicizing the issue by labeling what is happening as "virtue signaling". Nobody on this thread is raising issues just to be "good" or on some "good side" (known as virtue signaling). Instead, what I have observed is people concerned that Blacks have gotten the short end of the stick in so many ways and so we are happy to see there is a major attempt to remedy the situation.  Injustice and abuse is revolting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

While that war was another of the US's big screw-ups in our history, it had absolutely nothing to do with sending young folk off to war just to keep them from having a good time or to discipline them.  

It was exactly that. I lived through it.  I was young.  I was there. I know what the adults talked about.  There was great joy every time a long haired young man, a "hippie," was forced to get a GI head shave and shipped off away from the young women.  

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Desiree Moonwinder said:

It was exactly that. I lived through it.  I was young.  I was there. I know what the adults talked about.  There was great joy every time a long haired young man, a "hippie," was forced to get a GI head shave and shipped off away from the young women.  

 

8 hours ago, Desiree Moonwinder said:

The boys of my generation were sent to get shot up in Vietnam for no apparent reason other than to discipline us for otherwise enjoying life and having a good time. 

...

All I could tell was that the old people wanted to send the young people off to Vietnam for disciplinary purposes.  We were otherwise having a good time, and they didn't like that yet we we of legal age and they couldn't spank us.  So, they invented some pretext to draft the boys and send them off to die for no good reason. 

 

While most of us didn't agree with the US getting involved in the war and there might have been plenty of folks that enjoyed seeing the "hippies" get their hair cut, the US did not enter into that war "specifically to discipline the youth".  That is nothing but narcissistic thinking.   Honestly - thinking that the US jumped into a war just to keep our youth from having fun implies maybe a few too many drugs were enjoyed during that time.

 

Edited by LittleMe Jewell
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
38 minutes ago, Desiree Moonwinder said:
3 hours ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

While that war was another of the US's big screw-ups in our history, it had absolutely nothing to do with sending young folk off to war just to keep them from having a good time or to discipline them.  

It was exactly that. I lived through it.  I was young.  I was there. I know what the adults talked about.  There was great joy every time a long haired young man, a "hippie," was forced to get a GI head shave and shipped off away from the young women. 

I was just reading about that in the MegaMachine book, and it sparked off a bit of research for me.
In the 60's early 70's seems the conservative elements of society that wanted to control their wage slaves (who produce excess profits for the CEO's of our unjust system) were freaked out about all these so-called "radicals" rebelling against the established system. The increasing struggle for women's rights, rights for Blacks, worker's rights, opposition to wars, and more -- these were all threatening to the conservative establishment.

I'm sure they didn't want you to have any fun as you were their enemy, but it went a little deeper  -- they were threatened by the loss of control over the increasing amount of people demanding justice. 

* And so how is it you changed from a hippie to a conservative fan of the market?

Edited by Luna Bliss
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Desiree Moonwinder said:

There was great joy every time a long haired young man, a "hippie," was forced to get a GI head shave and shipped off

Maybe from people around you but I didn't see any of that.  Of course, my family lived in Kent, Ohio at the time.  I saw both sides of it.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

I was just reading about that in the MegaMachine book, and it sparked off a bit of research for me.
In the 60's early 70's seems the conservative elements of society that wanted to control their wage slaves (who produce excess profits for the CEO's of our unjust system) were freaked out about all these so-called "radicals" rebelling against the established system. The increasing struggle for women's rights, rights for Blacks, worker's rights, opposition to wars, and more -- these were all threatening to the conservative establishment.

I'm sure they didn't want you to have any fun as you were their enemy, but it went a little deeper  -- they were threatened by the loss of control over the increasing amount of people demanding justice. 

Aye.  I don't think the average American over 40 could find Vietnam on the map, but then did know that these draft-age kids with their peace, love, rock and roll, long hair, and birth control had to be stopped at all costs. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Desiree Moonwinder said:

Aye.  I don't think the average American over 40 could find Vietnam on the map, but then did know that these draft-age kids with their peace, love, rock and roll, long hair, and birth control had to be stopped at all costs. 

Do you mean average American “under” 40?  Not over?

My father was an MP in the mid & late 60s, & he lost many friends and a few cousins not only during the conflict-war, but I was keenly aware of all of it as someone we called my uncle, my dad’s best friend suffered terribly for decades with the affects of Agent Orange.  
 

I’d say most of Generation X can attest to similar lives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Pixie Kobichenko said:

Do you mean average American “under” 40?  Not over?

My father was an MP in the mid & late 60s, & he lost many friends and a few cousins not only during the conflict-war, but I was keenly aware of all of it as someone we called my uncle, my dad’s best friend suffered terribly for decades with the affects of Agent Orange.  
 

I’d say most of Generation X can attest to similar lives.

Same, my father was drafted and served in Vietnam. He ended up serving 23 years in the Navy and retired with a pension at like 43 years old. I don't think he took it as some sort of punishment either.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Pixie Kobichenko said:

Do you mean average American “under” 40?  Not over?

Insert "in the 1960s and early 1970s" if that helps.  

Read what the Governor said just prior to the Kent State shootings to understand the mentality at the time.  You may not feel the love. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_State_shootings

The very next day, "Twenty-eight National Guard soldiers fired approximately 67 rounds over a period of 13 seconds, killing four students and wounding nine others, one of whom suffered permanent paralysis."  The students were unarmed and 20 to 200 yards away, as detailed in the article. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Desiree Moonwinder said:

Insert "in the 1960s and early 1970s" if that helps.  

Read what the Governor said just prior to the Kent State shootings to understand the mentality at the time.  You may not feel the love. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_State_shootings

The very next day, "Twenty-eight National Guard soldiers fired approximately 67 rounds over a period of 13 seconds, killing four students and wounding nine others, one of whom suffered permanent paralysis."  The students were unarmed and 20 to 200 yards away, as detailed in the article. 

I clicked the link but I can’t read-skim that big of a chunk of info to look for the gov. speech.. (I’m not being snarky I have IIH & it affects my ability to concentrate & comprehension).  But I can only assume that the speech was out of touch with the reality of the times & people he was supposed to represent.  =/ 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Pixie Kobichenko said:

I clicked the link but I can’t read-skim that big of a chunk of info to look for the gov. speech.. (I’m not being snarky I have IIH & it affects my ability to concentrate & comprehension).  But I can only assume that the speech was out of touch with the reality of the times & people he was supposed to represent.  =/ 

Presumably it's this part:

Quote

During a press conference at the Kent firehouse, an emotional Governor Rhodes pounded on the desk,[23] which can be heard in the recording of his speech.[24] He called the student protesters un-American, referring to them as revolutionaries set on destroying higher education in Ohio.

We've seen here at the city of Kent especially, probably the most vicious form of campus-oriented violence yet perpetrated by dissident groups... they make definite plans of burning, destroying, and throwing rocks at police and at the National Guard and the Highway Patrol. ...this is when we're going to use every part of the law enforcement agency of Ohio to drive them out of Kent. We are going to eradicate the problem. We're not going to treat the symptoms. ...and these people just move from one campus to the other and terrorize the community. They're worse than the brown shirts and the communist element and also the night riders and the vigilantes. They're the worst type of people that we harbor in America. Now I want to say this. They are not going to take over [the] campus. I think that we're up against the strongest, well-trained, militant, revolutionary group that has ever assembled in America.[25]

Thing is, this seems counter to any claim that the conservative establishment wanted to discipline those long-haired protestors simply for having fun. (To me it sounds like a modern right-wing rant over the dread "antifa" which, though wildly uninformed, is motivated by genuine fear.)

Kent State was tragic, but it exemplifies just how the Vietnam War divided US society, in the midst of other contemporaneous turmoil and a decade of political assassinations. There was a real sense that the country was coming apart, and the stakes were high.

Also, although I can't think why it could matter, anybody of draft age in those times would have been able to not only find Vietnam on the map, but also recite the kilometers and flight time from Da Nang Air Base to the DMZ.

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Qie Niangao said:

Thing is, this seems counter to any claim that the conservative establishment wanted to discipline those long-haired protestors simply for having fun. (To me it sounds like a modern right-wing rant over the dread "antifa" which, though wildly uninformed, is motivated by genuine fear.)

I'll grant you that relative to this specific quote.  I would like to point out that the good Governor seemed more concerned with the young Americans than with anything going on in the war zone.  

The relevance to Juneteenth is that those with money and connections could avoid the draft, or get enough college to go in as officers (cf., https://www.sss.gov/history-and-records/changes-from-vietnam-to-now/).  The disadvantaged were disproportionately at risk.  

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Paul Hexem said:
20 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

Please stop it, Paul.  This is an important moment for Black people in America, and for the country.

I disagree. It's little more than surface level pandering.

Passing meaningful laws with real consequences for violators, those are important moments. 

On one level, you are correct. We desperately need to make changes in our laws and -- more importantly -- our behavior. If we were to think that creating a national holiday is the final solution to our racial inequities, that would indeed be shallow "surface level pandering". At the same time, though, formal recognition of Juneteenth is a powerful symbol that our country is acknowledging its past and offering hope that MLK's long arc of history continues to bend toward justice. 

Symbols are not insignificant.  They serve as metaphors to focus our attention on what we value. A flag, a monument, or a named day of remembrance ask us to stop what we are doing and reflect on why we are doing it.  I visit the Vietnam Memorial in Washington DC and remember all the young men from my high school who went there and did not return, or returned as changed men. As I listen to the excitement about our new Juneteenth day, I remark on how much cultural attitudes have already changed since I was young but I think about how much still needs to change. I have the same emotional reactions on Memorial Day, Veterans Day, and other times when we are asked to take time to focus. Symbols are like lenses for looking at ourselves.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Desiree Moonwinder said:

I'll grant you that relative to this specific quote.  I would like to point out that the good Governor seemed more concerned with the young Americans than with anything going on in the war zone.  

The relevance to Juneteenth is that those with money and connections could avoid the draft, or get enough college to go in as officers (cf., https://www.sss.gov/history-and-records/changes-from-vietnam-to-now/).  The disadvantaged were disproportionately at risk.  

Of course white privileged men could avoid the draft.  George Bush is a prime example.  Everyone knows that.  Perhaps the reason more blacks were drafted proportional than whites has more to do with who was on the draft boards at the time.

Blacks were starkly under-represented on draft boards in this era, with none on the draft boards of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, or Arkansas. In Louisiana, Jack Helms, a Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, served on the draft board from 1957 until 1966. 

They had also lowered the education requirements at some point during the war.

The rules were changed, no doubt, to make it more equitable, in 1969 and used a lottery as opposed to the draft board method.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

In the 60's early 70's seems the conservative elements of society that wanted to control their wage slaves (who produce excess profits for the CEO's of our unjust system) were freaked out about all these so-called "radicals" rebelling against the established system. The increasing struggle for women's rights, rights for Blacks, worker's rights, opposition to wars, and more -- these were all threatening to the conservative establishment.

The Democrats were in control when the  US entered the Vietnam war and for the next many years & Presidencies. So I'm not sure how the concept of the conservatives wanting to control the radicals plays into the US getting involved in that war.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

The Democrats were in control when the  US entered the Vietnam war and for the next many years & Presidencies. So I'm not sure how the concept of the conservatives wanting to control the radicals plays into the US getting involved in that war.

Im not sure if conservatives have yet fully drifted from the democrat party yet by the 60s. It wasn't until 65 the same year the Vietnam War began. It was a very different political time. Being conservative didn't guarantee you also being a republican in those days. In fact conservatives have been part of the democrat party historically much longer than they have been associated with the republican party.

Edited by Finite
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Finite said:

Im not sure if conservatives have yet fully drifted from the democrat party yet by the 60s. It wasn't until 65 the same year the Vietnam War began. It was a very different political time. Being conservative didn't guarantee you also being a republican in those days. In fact conservatives have been part of the democrat party historically much longer than they have been associated with the republican party.

I think to qualify as a liberal you have to hold recent views.  I don't think even Karl Marx would qualify as a liberal these days.  Read some of his writings on race and gender and see what you think. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Desiree Moonwinder said:

I think to qualify as a liberal you have to hold recent views.  I don't think even Karl Marx would qualify as a liberal these days.  Read some of his writings on race and gender and see what you think. 

Yes it's certainly all relative to the era. It's kind of like saying Abe Lincoln would be a republican in today's landscape. I think he'd have a hard time choosing a party. He'd be either moderate democrat or moderate republican I guess? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 116 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...