[nick demis]

[QUOTE=davem4616;2000949]there are far too many loony-tunes running around out there...you learn from history...you don't try to cover it up, or try to judge it through the eyes of the present

Wasn't it great when the "looney-tunes" was the cartoons on Saturday morning?

[Laker14]

Speaking of Looney Tunes, it's just about time for a "That's All Folks!" for this thread.

[WindyCityzen]

What’s your source for this inflammatory “statement?” Do you believe all the stuff posted to rile you up and keep you controlled?

[MandoMan]

[QUOTE=Laker14;2001002]

Originally Posted by n8xwb

I read this early today ----

"The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) determined recently that America's founding documents may be "harmful or difficult" for some users to view since they reflect "outdated, biased, offensive, and possibly violent views and opinions."[/QUOT

Here's a link to the NARA site, explaining further that statement.
NARA’s Statement on Potentially Harmful Content | National Archives

I think what the site attempts to explain, at the top of the page, is that documents from the past, and subsequent archivists' descriptions of documents and events may contain language that, at the time, was accepted, but now is not.

As I read the page, I understand it to say that they are working to eliminate racist, and exclusionary or otherwise offensive language going forward, and providing insight as to the general attitudes of society at the time the historical documents were drafted and archived, but NOT to rewrite or change the original documents, or archivist's explanations as they were originally drafted.

I hope this is what they are saying and doing. It is important, in order to avoid repeating bad history, to know what it was, and not to whitewash it into what we wish it was, or what we would like to believe it was.

Thank you for that. The Original Poster seems to have completely misunderstood the web site, which is explaining why the records wii NOT be changed but will continue to offend some people today. Hooray for that! I’m sick and tired of people trying to erase people from history because they were people of their times. (For example, a couple years ago I visited Monticello and was astonished to find that Jefferson’s political career was barely mentioned. Instead, I was given the idea that the most important thing about him was that didn’t free his “enslaved persons” or had them.)

Here’s what the site actually says:
“ What harmful or difficult content may be found in the National Archives Catalog and our web pages?

Some items may:
reflect racist, sexist, ableist, misogynistic/misogynoir, and xenophobic opinions and attitudes;
be discriminatory towards or exclude diverse views on sexuality, gender, religion, and more;
include graphic content of historical events such as violent death, medical procedures, crime, wars/terrorist acts, natural disasters and more;
demonstrate bias and exclusion in institutional collecting and digitization policies.

Why does the National Archives make potentially harmful content available?

NARA’s mission is to preserve and provide access to the permanent records of the federal government. NARA, working in conjunction with diverse communities, will seek to balance the preservation of this history with sensitivity to how these materials are presented to and perceived by users.”

So they aren’t rewriting it, but trying to present it in a way that will avoid complaints. That makes sense.

[Bay Kid]

They still need their pacifier.

[Laker14]

If you think about it, the original archivists, by using the language of the day, reflect the attitudes of the day in their explanations of the laws and events they seek to shed light on, and by so doing, create yet another historical waypoint, to be further examined and explained in the light of more current sensibilities. The process never ends, nor should it, as long as we acknowledge the original attitudes, and don't try to pretend they never existed.

[Lindaws]

CRT at its best. That’s why statues coming down . Wipe out our history.

[chuckpedrey]

Glenn Beck did a piece on that issue yesterday. He reported that a few believe that the documents are too “offensive” to some and therefore should be replaced.
Come quickly Lord Jesus

[camaguey48]

Originally Posted by chuckpedrey

Glenn Beck did a piece on that issue yesterday. He reported that a few believe that the documents are too “offensive” to some and therefore should be replaced.
Come quickly Lord Jesus

Shame on this mess!

[ithos]

Originally Posted by blueash

It is great to find that you support teaching real history, not white washed history. And that having children learn that there are some ugly facts in life, like loosing a soccer game or that white people systematically enslaved, raped, lynched and impoverished non-whites as a founding principle of this nation needs to be taught even if it makes a white person feel the sads.

Your presentism approach to history conveniently ignores the profound impact that our founding principles had on the course of human kind. The type of inequities you describe had existed for several millennia throughout the world.

Our children should learn the good, bad and the ugly. But many only want to highlight the negative because what they truly despise is the rights enshrined in our Constitution that severely limits the power of our government.

Have you ever taken a moment and pondered on why billions of "people of color" dream of settling in the US? It is because the values of our founding took root and help eliminate the injustices that you obsess over not only in our country but in many others.

America isn't perfect. But the principles we hold dear are perfect. If there's one thing I've learned, it's that even on our worst day, we are blessed to live in America.

Nikki Haley

[Ptmckiou]

Originally Posted by Lindaws

CRT at its best. That’s why statues coming down . Wipe out our history.

Removing the idolatry and glorifying of traitors of our country is not rewriting history. It’s just appropriate. You don’t go to Germany and see glorifying statues in parks of Nazi generals. Allowing glorification of traitors that wanted to take over our country has allowed the “participation award” to the loser mindset to develop. It was the ultimate participation award of our past.

[KRMACK55]

Originally Posted by davem4616

there are far too many loony-tunes running around out there...you learn from history...you don't try to cover it up, or try to judge it through the eyes of the present

IMHO, among the mistakes that we've made was giving every kid a trophy for just showing up, so that their fragile feelings wouldn't be scared at a young age

we have a generation of people that grew up in a bubble and now aren't able to accept reality

we also have a lot of people in academia that are very biased....and seem to preach their own bias vs teach the course content...
then when these kids graduate and they realize they weren't prepared for the real world, they whine and pout and decide they're not going to pay off their college loans

the country I grew up in no longer exists

Thank you so much for that summary.

[Heyitsrick]

Originally Posted by charlieo1126@gmail.com

Yes he was able to keep his head , McCarthy had him thrown out of the National Union but he kept his iron workers Union card he did have a lot of resentment because of the the many lives destroyed by one man., I hear they still honor his memory in his home town .

There was an interesting column written about McCarthy - but much more broadly about whether anything McCarthy was trumpeting at the time had any truth to it insofar as the left side of politics was concerned. It was written in the Washington Post in 1996 by the late Nicholas von Hoffman, and titled "Was McCarthy right about the left?"

von Hoffman was no friend of right-wingers, and he wrote what he believed. His words ended up getting him fired from CBS's 60 Minutes, actually, when he referred to Nixon as "a dead mouse on the kitchen floor that everyone was afraid to touch and throw in the garbage.”

von Hoffman was a community organizer for Saul Alinksy in the early 60's. von Hoffman was a left-winger, to be sure.

OK, back to the column -

von Hoffman found nothing redeeming in McCarthy's behavior. Here's how he characterized him:

Originally Posted by von Hoffman

McCarthy, as his subsequent history would show, knew little about communism, on this side of the ocean or the other. This loutish, duplicitous bully, who carried, not the names of Reds but bottles of hootch in his briefcase died in disgrace and of alcoholism.

There is a "but..." here, though. The next passage from von Hoffman reads this way:

Originally Posted by von Hoffman

Yet, in a global sense McCarthy was on to something. McCarthy may have exaggerated the scope of the problem but not by much. The government was the workplace of perhaps 100 communist agents in 1943-45. He just didn't know their names.

Last summary:

Originally Posted by von Hoffman

An adequate history of the McCarthy/Truman period, one that gives proper attention to the class, ethnic, religious and cultural antagonisms of those times, has not yet been written. But enough new information has come to light about the communists in the U.S. government that we may now say that point by point Joe McCarthy got it all wrong and yet was still closer to the truth than those who ridiculed him.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archi...-5f352acbf5de/

[Luggage]

Kind of like removing a Confederate statue in Lake county because some people are offended.

[Luggage]

Kind of like the movie ratings we have today. It's simply a warning and if you're offended don't enter and read, just like this blog. I am amazed at the people that simply won't accept that there are other opinions in the world than theirs