|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: PC Gone Too Far | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member
|
And we don't do that anymore? Tell me why sanitizing is bad only when the label is applied to the side you oppose? If we currently sanitizing the record regarding our own actions, perhaps that too will be corrected at some point. Are you asking me if I object to that? Why wouldn't my future hurt feelings about my present be considered PC? Why are only one sides feelings invalid?
Are our judgments today are so clean and so pure and so accurate that we can safely erase the record of history Putting the record in a museum, or leaving it in place with context does not erase the record. On the other hand, preserving a record of lies does not promote learning either. Regarding judgments in general, I'm sure there are some gray areas. But I'm completely comfortable with history's judgment of slavery and the South's reliance on the institution. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8513 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
Telling the truth (as we see it) and erasing the past are two different things. And if the motivation for erasing the past is offended feelings then that is the epitome of PC. Hyperbole. We are not erasing the past or sanitizing the past. We are (finally) recognizing that the celebrations and honors of these things are anathema in our society. Putting them up in a museum allows the future to see them and remember what happened and, more importantly, why. Trying to stigmatize these moves as Politically Correct is actually no stain against them. Taking away the undeserved honors and acknowledging the deserved horrors is not only Politically Correct but is socially and humanely correct.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
caffeine Member (Idle past 1024 days) Posts: 1800 From: Prague, Czech Republic Joined:
|
I've posted this as a general reply since I can't figure out whether it's Percy or NoNukes I's arguing with.
When we have a cultural group who idenitifies with historical character X, and so that they can feel comfortable with doing so they have whitewashed their version of X, is it really in the best interests of society to disabuse them of their whitewashed version of history? We might think that doing so would cause them to abandon their support of such an ethically dubious character, but I'm not sure this works on a practical level. Their attachement to their idea of person X may be a much deeper and more visceral part of their identity than can be nudged by rational argument. If we insist on bringing their mind X's moral failings, it could be a much simpler task to rationalise these failings away than to abandon their emotional attachment. I haven't thought this through deeply yet, but I fear that forcing people to acknowledge that their heroes were slave owners and racists may be more likely to encourage them to justify and accomodate slavery and racism in their world-view, then to cause them to reject their heroes.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8513 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
...but I fear that forcing people to acknowledge that their heroes were slave owners and racists may be more likely to encourage them to justify and accomodate slavery and racism in their world-view... You are correct. But no one is, or should be, expecting people's ideas to suddenly switch gears. The hope is that future generations will not be as enamored (or as insulted) as having these things constantly in their face held up as examples to be honored. Today's bigot most probably is already a lost cause.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member
|
Is it really in the best interests of society to disabuse them of their whitewashed version of history? Good question. What if the whitewashing is a lie that essentially discredits the victims of slavery What result should we go for? How does not facing the horror of the past help ensure that we don't re-enact them. Beyond that, I'm not convinced that racists need any excuses to hate, and celebrating other racists surely dos not help reject racism. In some cases, these symbols were raised for the purposes of championing racism. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22392 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
NoNukes writes: And we don't do that anymore?
Tell me why sanitizing is bad only when the label is applied to the side you oppose? If we currently sanitizing the record regarding our own actions, perhaps that too will be corrected at some point. Are you asking me if I object to that? Why wouldn't my future hurt feelings about my present be considered PC? Why are only one sides feelings invalid? Nothing I said was intended to take sides, in fact, the opposite. We shouldn't assume that the passage of time brings increasingly accurate assessments (what you called corrections), just different ones. Indelibly altering the historical record handicaps future generation's ability to make their own assessments. What any generation or people records in its constructions and writings can only be interpreted to the extent it survives. As to whether your future self's negative view of your past self could be considered PC, I don't think the PC concept translates to the level of a single individual. To me the concept only makes sense in a political context when advantage is sought through claims of feeling offended.
Are our judgments today are so clean and so pure and so accurate that we can safely erase the record of history Putting the record in a museum,... Depends upon the specifics, but much can be lost transferring historical artifacts of any size to a museum.
...or leaving it in place with context does not erase the record. Yes, of course, though it must be kept in mind that protecting history is situation specific. When possible and practical in situ is the best way to preserve history, but the elements or construction or other things can force a search for other solutions.
On the other hand, preserving a record of lies does not promote learning either. The last thing we should contemplate is actively altering the record of history to suit our own sensibilities, no matter what form it takes. The preservation of a Greek temple is no more an endorsement of Hellenistic gods than preservation of a Southern Civil War memorial is an endorsement of slavery or Southern apologies. It's a part of history, a time capsule from the past, not an expression of contemporary thought.
But I'm completely comfortable with history's judgment of slavery and the South's reliance on the institution. I'm arguing in defense of history, not slavery. It can't be denied that when exactly something passes out of the present and into history is ambiguous, but the Civil War was a century and a half ago, and the memorial that opened this thread almost as far back. If we allow the politics of being offended to censor our record of history in forms like war memorials, where does it stop? Yesterday the Southern flag became offensive, today war memorials, tomorrow the homes of famous Southerners, eventually what else? Where does it stop? Principle demands that we reject the politics of being offended for everything, not just for things we like. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22392 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
AZPaul3 writes: We are not erasing the past or sanitizing the past. Good to hear, but that's what NoNukes was proposing, sanitizing the past.
We are not erasing the past or sanitizing the past. We are (finally) recognizing that the celebrations and honors of these things are anathema in our society. Southerners honoring war dead are anathema while Northerners doing the same are not? Because some people find Southern war memorials offensive? That's PC.
Trying to stigmatize these moves as Politically Correct is actually no stain against them. Taking away the undeserved honors and acknowledging the deserved horrors is not only Politically Correct but is socially and humanely correct. Yes, it's PC, and principle demands that we always reject the politics of feeling offended, whether or not its directed at something we don't like. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member
|
Good to hear, but that's what NoNukes was proposing, sanitizing the past. That is not what I've proposed. At most I've talked about addressing things that are themselves a sanitizing pf the past. Putting a statute in a museum does not sanitize anything or adding context does not add anything. If anyone here is guilty of insisting on sanitizing I'd suggest it is the person who does not feel we should judge folks harshly for supporting an evil institution and who suggest that such judgments cannot be fact based. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
Nothing I said was intended to take sides, in fact, the opposite. We shouldn't assume that the passage of time brings increasingly accurate assessments (what you called corrections), just different ones. Nor should we assume the opposite; that an objective view by a non participant is less accurate than a motivated view by participants who lived with and accepted slavery for financial and social reasons benefitting themselves. In the case of slavery as practiced in the South it seems we can make an objective judgment that the institution was evil. Nothing you've said even hints at a fact based reason not to reach that conclusion. You can pretend that 'maybe it wasn't' if you wish to do so, but nothing you've posted so far, including your hypothetical about slavery evolving into something humane justifies the initial inhumane treatment. Beyond that, the evolution never happened anyway. With regards to the premise of this thread, namely that facts may not have the power to convince, I accept that such things occur, and even that they frequently occur. I don't accept that the premise provides as an excuse for not properly evaluating slavery either. At best it is a partial explanation for behavior. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8513 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
Southerners honoring war dead are anathema while Northerners doing the same are not? We've trod this path before. Message 30 Message 42 No use doing it again.
Because some people find Southern war memorials offensive? That's PC. So what? It's also right.
Yes, it's PC, and principle demands that we always reject the politics of feeling offended, whether or not its directed at something we don't like. Bullshit. Principle, and right, and conscience, and reality demands that we stop rubbing this horror in people's faces like it was a good thing! Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22392 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
NoNukes writes: Good to hear, but that's what NoNukes was proposing, sanitizing the past.
That is not what I've proposed. At most I've talked about addressing things that are themselves a sanitizing pf the past. I understood the argument to be for altering the historical record, from any time period, to better conform to contemporary views. If that's not your position, great. I believe our goal should be to preserve the historical record in as pristine a condition as we can manage given the many constraints.
If anyone here is guilty of insisting on sanitizing I'd suggest it is the person who does not feel we should judge folks harshly for supporting an evil institution and who suggest that such judgments cannot be fact based. I believe that people should be judged in the context of their time and place in history. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22392 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
NoNukes writes: Nor should we assume the opposite; that an objective view by a non participant is less accurate than a motivated view by participants who lived with and accepted slavery for financial and social reasons benefitting themselves. Okay.
In the case of slavery as practiced in the South it seems we can make an objective judgment that the institution was evil. Nothing you've said even hints at a fact based reason not to reach that conclusion. You can pretend that 'maybe it wasn't' if you wish to do so, but nothing you've posted so far, including your hypothetical about slavery evolving into something humane justifies the initial inhumane treatment. Beyond that, the evolution never happened anyway. I'm pretty sure you're thinking of the other thread, Facts are Overrated, so I'll just comment that I still think you've misunderstood my arguments there.
With regards to the premise of this thread, namely that facts may not have the power to convince,... Yeah, you're definitely thinking of the other thread. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22392 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
AZPaul3 writes: Southerners honoring war dead are anathema while Northerners doing the same are not?
We've trod this path before. Message 30 Message 42 No use doing it again. Agreed.
Yes, it's PC, and principle demands that we always reject the politics of feeling offended, whether or not its directed at something we don't like. Bullshit. Principle, and right, and conscience, and reality demands that we stop rubbing this horror in people's faces like it was a good thing! If there are objective reasons for degrading the historical record then I'd love to hear them, but what I'm hearing instead is a lot of emotion, never a good basis for making decisions. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hyroglyphx Inactive Member |
Hmm. I don't know, Percy, let me think on this a second. A monument honoring those who fought and died for the cause of treason against the United States. What could possibly be wrong with that? Everything? No hyperbole there whatsoever... Let's talk about "treason" in respects to America in general. America is ostensibly and principally built upon "treason," depending upon who you're asking. That was most certainly the British Empire's take on it. The phrase: "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter," seems to apply nicely.
Southern soldiers deserve monuments every bit as much as Northern soldiers. No. No, they don't. If Union soldiers have monuments, why not Confederate soldiers? Or are you one of those people who looks at the issue in black and white -- Union good, Confederacy bad? The reality is that the Civil War was a complex issue and a tragedy of the highest order. Internal division that spills the blood of thousands is tragic. The other issue is pretending that history has no significance here. The US spent a considerable fortune trying to stop the spread of communism. Even though I disagree with communism in principle, and disagree with the way the US handled it, I see no reason to start destroying Lenin's statues. There is a historical significance, right or wrong.
I hope they drop the damned thing and it shatters into dust. Its prominent new home could be the local landfill. ISIS feels the same way about monuments they disagree with too. Allahu Ahkbar! *raises glass to AZPaul3 in a toast* Edited by Hyroglyphx, : No reason given."Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8513 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
If there are objective reasons for degrading the historical record then I'd love to hear them, but what I'm hearing instead is a lot of emotion... More hyperbole. We are not "degrading" the historical record. If anything, we are asking that record to reflect the reality of the events as considerably less than the honorable treatment, the glorification of the Southern cause, these monuments and symbols so strongly and wrongly represent. Of course there will be a lot of emotion in these instances. This is an emotional issue wrought of a very devastating human hurt. After 150 years of having that hurt rubbed into the faces of a oppressed people, on public property, sponsored by organs of government, correcting that official bias by removing the symbols of that oppression, removing our government's official sponsorship of that bias, may be emotion laden but it is also proper and about fucking time. Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024