Cultural loss

[steev]

Yesterday, Monday, 22nd June; the USA had two momentous events occur: the Confederate battle flag was dropped from the South Carolina statehouse, where it had flown since the civil rights struggles of the early sixties, and Don Featherstone, designer of the plastic, pink, lawn flamingo, died. Now, really, isn't fun good; ought we not mourn the passage of those who have brought us fun?

I don't disrespect the 12/13ths of my kith/kin (that I know of) who were on the wrong side of that unCivil War, but I don't deny that they were on the wrong side; I'm not saying "losing side"; I'm saying "wrong side". The real Confederate flag, the "Bonny Blue Flag", is rarely paraded; only the Confederate battle flag is displayed, mostly by adolescents and the ignorant; may their minds be opened and their mouths shut; inshallah!

[templeton]

I wouldn't dare comment on this domestic US issue - people get very touchy about flags - but just googled the confederate flags on wiki - who would be brave enough to fly the south carolina secessionist flag these days, with it's crescent moon and palm tree? Likely to be hit by a drone strike, I reckon!
T

[longhorngardens]

With all our problems and the masses are worried about a flag....

[steev]

Exactly; this is some silly shit, but it does distract from real problems, which may be the point.

[steev]

T; I don't know where/why anyone would conflate the flag of the Confederacy (the Bonny Blue flag) with the Confederate battle flag (a version of the British stars-and-bars), but the ignorant, stupid, and hateful continue to do so.

Clearly, I expect no non-American to be foolish enough to weigh in on this bullshit; I just need to call it out for the unmitigated bullshit that it is.

[PatrickW]

There's been a lot of talk in the press here the last few days about Obama's use of the 'n-word'. I think in general the conclusion is while it's never okay to use it to attack or verbally abuse someone, times have changed, and it's no longer a forbidden word or something only a black person can say. If you're having a frank discussion about racism, it's becoming more acceptable to say something like that. It's still a powerful word, offensive to many, and something I don't need to spell out here.

I think the confederate flag has to be viewed more along these lines. It's absolutely unacceptable to use as justification for white supremacy or racism. It's offensive to many, powerful, and perhaps something that doesn't belong to be associated with official institutions. It's also really okay to use together with rock music, traditional cooking and foods. For many military fans, it's a symbol of brilliant military strategy. To other people it's a symbol of politeness, hospitality, social cohesion or many other positive things.

I think the shooting in SC is very sad. While the issue of the flag is very superficial in comparison, I personally think it's fine to have a discussion of the role it played. If the intention of the shooting was to further the extreme views associated with the flag, maybe it's appropriate for countermeasures to be taken.

[steev]

While I recognize some of those Ideas, how do folks feel about the Nazi swastika flag?

[steev]

Times change, as does language (don't get me started on the current usage "try and verb", which is replacing "try to verb"; how can one parse/diagram "try and verb"? Wow! How many years has it been since kids were taught to "diagram" sentences, perhaps leading to precision in communication? Doubtless that's more out-dated than cursive penmanship, and just look what an awful effect that loss of skill has had on snow-writing).

In the will of one of my ancestors, he used the N-word to describe a mare he left to his daughter; clearly it was not there a racial pejorative to him, just a descriptive of the horse; sad that it has become an insult, as it is currently used. Sad that we use so much language to insult/demean; recognizing that language is communicating, I think the problem isn't about the word (or the flag), but about what is meant to be communicated. Clearly, some words and some symbols are about communicating feelings/beliefs that are very negative/hateful/confrontational/fearful. That's unfortunate, but the fault in not in the words/symbols; it's in the people using them so. Simply telling those people to shut up won't solve the problem.

[PatrickW]

I'm personally a strong believer that free speech is nearly always the best way, but this is only true on a level playing field, and when people aren't hurt. Blogs and social media are excellent examples of this. Anyone can say what they want, but only interesting people are listened to. No one really cares if someone puts up a blog with nazi propaganda or the n-word, because none of us need to pay any attention to it if we don't want to. Those of us who say more positive things become more credible over time, and this is how things should work in a perfect world. The Internet is a great tool of Democracy.

On the other hand, Europe has a strong tradition of making decisions based on consensus. This is also how academia often works, for example when defining history in textbooks. Academics get together, talk, write and otherwise give their opinions, and history becomes the lowest common denominator among them -- whatever they don't disagree on. Points of disagreement become fringe ideas, and forgotten over time. I think this is one of the reasons why nearly all Europeans know American history very well, but European history is less understood by Americans, because many parts of it are disputed and so difficult to put into textbooks and teach. Part of the problem is there are a few Europeans, including some scholars, who know they can rewrite history just through denial, and so they do. When denial has more influence over people speaking the truth, it's necessary to correct this imbalance.

This is the main reason why denial of the Holocaust is a criminal offence in Germany and France. If 1 or 2 loonies start denying it, no one will care, but if enough important people start denying it, it will surely disappear from the history books. What started happening was first the number of 2 million Jews killed was agreed, but then someone important came along and said it was more like 1.5M, then 750K. If governments didn't set this number into law, it was just going to fall to the lowest common denominator and the Holocaust was going to turn into a minor event.

The reality is also the nazis came to power in Germany, not because the majority of people believed in them, but because of a small number of extremists. It's just necessary to have laws that prevent this from happening again, and this means telling some people they don't have freedom of expression within the context of Germany or other countries.

Fortunately, the Internet is there, and anyone can avoid jurisdictions where saying things might be illegal, by using servers located in the US or other countries. It's not really possible to tell someone to shut up anymore, but often very easy to ignore them.

[castanea]

Jun 23, 2015 23:48:23 GMT -5 longhorngardens said:

With all our problems and the masses are worried about a flag....

Apparently if we can pass a law outlawing the Confederate battle flag, all racism will stop, and we all know that racism is the worst "ism" on earth.

[steev]

Bear in mind that that flag wasn't flown on the SC statehouse until it went up in the early 60's as a protest against the passage of civil rights laws.

I don't think it's a question of outlawing that flag, but of showing at least a tad of grace about where it is flown. The SC statehouse is, I think, supposed to represent all the people of SC, not just the melanin-deficient; of course, if SC (or any other governing body) doesn't want to be responsible for the well-being of some portion of its constituents, I'm sure they will see the justice of not taxing them. Say! That sounds like "No taxation without representation!"

About 38% of my forebears were from North Carolina, which provided 1/4 of the soldiers (and 1/4 of the casualties) of the Uncivil War Between the States; I treasure the history I know of my family, warts and all, but that is not to say that I think everything they did was right, any more than I think everything my British ancestors did to my Scots ancestors was right. Those people were who they were, living where and when they did, doing what they did in the culture in which they were immersed. I am of those people, but not those people.

I grew up in California while it was a thoroughly segregated state; it wasn't outright Jim Crow, but black folks were utterly prohibited from living in some parts of any town, so there were only certain schools and other services available to them in any town big enough to have more than one establishment of whatever.

Living in a familial culture in which adults didn't talk about "some things" in front of children and being hardly in touch with my father for 40 years, I was ~50 when I discovered what a racist he was. I think my point is that repression is like preventing an abscess from draining; it just festers and gets worse. That's why I value free, even loose, speech. It's like casting your bread on the water; mostly the ducks just eat it; occasionally it might come back as a sandwich (hopefully not a knuckle sandwich, but even that is valuable feedback about your environment, and, like me, you may have been orthodontially-deprived, anyway, so it's an opportunity to get some pretty implants).

[castanea]

It keeps getting sillier:

atlanta.cbslocal.com/2015/06/25/charleston-officer-fired-after-posting-confederate-flag-photo-on-facebook/

[MikeH]

Jun 26, 2015 1:40:23 GMT -5 steev said:

I grew up in California while it was a thoroughly segregated state; it wasn't outright Jim Crow, but black folks were utterly prohibited from living in some parts of any town, so there were only certain schools and other services available to them in any town big enough to have more than one establishment of whatever.

Might still be some red-lining going on - salt.umd.edu/T-RACES/demo/demo.html.  There's certainly residue from the days when it was highly visible - web.archive.org/web/20150627102333/http://salt.umd.edu/T-RACES/docs/jesus_hernandez_sacramento_merge.pdf -

The question that guides this inquiry asks why, following decades of social and civil rights reform, do markets continue to produce racial inequality in the distribution of wealth and other social goods? A more specific question is why , if we consider markets as race neutral, are toxic subprime loans concentrated in Sacramento‟s predominantly non-white neighborhoods?

Here are the codes for the maps:

"Green areas are "hot spots"; they are not yet fully built up. In nearly all instances they are the new well planned sections of the city, and almost synonymous with the areas where good mortgage lenders with available funds are willing to make their maximum loans to be amortized over a 10-15-year period -- perhaps up to 75-80% of the appraisal. They are homogeneous; in demand as residential locations in "good time" or "bad"; hence on the upgrade".

"Blue areas, as a rule, are completely developed. They are like a 1935 automobile still good, but not what the people are buying today who can afford a new one. They are the neighborhoods where good mortgage lenders will have a tendency to hold loan commitments 10-15% under the limit."

"Yellow areas are characterized by age, obsolescence, and change of style; expiring restrictions or lack of them; infiltration of a lower grade population; the presence of influences which increase sales resistance such as inadequate transportation, insufficient utilities, perhaps heavy tax burdens, poor maintenance of homes, etc. "Jerry" built areas are included, as well as neighborhoods lacking homogeneity. Generally, these areas have reached the transition period. Good mortgage lenders are more conservative in the Yellow areas and hold loan commitments under the lending ratio for the Green and Blue areas.

"Red areas represent those neighborhoods in which the things that are now taking place in the Yellow neighborhoods, have already happened. They are characterized by detrimental influences in a pronounced degree, undesirable population or infiltration of it. Low percentage of home ownership, very poor maintenance and often vandalism prevail. Unstable incomes of the people and difficult collections are usually prevalent. The areas are broader than the so-called slum districts. Some mortgage lenders may refuse to make loans in these neighborhoods and other will lend only on a conservative basis."

Perhaps the only thing that has changed since the early 60s is the moral outrage & civil disobedience. They seem to have been replaced with a tired, complacency. A black man in the White House seems to be more about form than substance when it comes to changing the ongoing inequality, prejudice and injustice. One might even enough argue that slavery has risen again if one looks at the privatized US penal system - www.alternet.org/story/151732/21st-century_slaves%3A_how_corporations_exploit_prison_labor . It would seem that the 13th Amendment: “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.” is being distorted and abused and no one cares.