In honor of Black History month

[Pheonixops]

BHM, hmmm.... Lemme see. Kunta Kinte, Hank Aaron, and MLK.

You need a whole month for that?

Thanks for showing your intelligence! Or maybe you were being sarcastic?

 

[Asclepias]

BHM, hmmm.... Lemme see. Kunta Kinte, Hank Aaron, and MLK.

You need a whole month for that?

Some small children and adult retards desperately need BHM like you just proved. .

 

[Foxfyre]

Thomas Sowell was mentioned, and he is my mentor, hero, and advisor when it comes to matters of race and racism. He has probably done more research and written more thought provoking commentary on the subject than any other individual.

On Black History Month (emphasis mine):

. . . .Another big problem with Black History Month is its narrowness. You cannot understand even your own history if that is the only history you know. Some explanations of what has happened in your history might sound plausible within the framework of just one people's history, but these explanations can collapse like a house of cards if you look at the same factors in the histories of other groups, other countries, and other eras.

Shelby Steele has pointed out that whites are desperate to escape guilt and blacks are desperate to escape implications of inferiority. But, viewed against the background of world history, neither group of Americans is unique. Nor are the differences between them. Both their anxieties are overblown.

Black-white differences in income, IQ, lifestyle or anything else you care to name are exceeded by differences between innumerable other groups around the world today and throughout history -- even when none of the factors that we blame for the differences in America was present.

For example, when the Romans invaded Britain, they came from an empire with magnificent art, architecture, literature, political organization and military might. But the Britons were an illiterate tribal people. There was not a building on the island, and no Briton's name had ever been recorded in the pages of history.

The Britons didn't build London. The Romans built London. And when the Romans left, four centuries later, the country fragmented into tribal domains again, the economy collapsed, and buildings and roads decayed. No one would have dreamed at that point that someday there would be a British Empire to exceed anything the Romans had ever achieved.

Maybe we need a British History Month.

--Thomas Sowell
Thomas Sowell

Again, elsewhere he, Shelby Steele, Morgan Freeman, and others have pointed out how the history involving black people is often missing from the history books, and of course Black History Month was implemented at least in part to combat that. But these men, who realistically see setting people apart as perpetuating the very racism it is intended to address, say we would be better served by taking a cold, hard look at what we are teaching people every day, year round. And correcting the skewed history that often exists in the textbooks.

Sowell is a smart guy, I wonder why he stated something like this:"Another big problem with Black History Month is its narrowness. You cannot understand even your own history if that is the only history you know.". Is he trying to imply that Black people don't know or study any other history than the history covered in "Black History Month"? In my opinion, one of the reasons "Black History Month" was created was the fact that people were learning about many different types of history (European, American, etc.) and that there should be additions to that history. Most of the history about Blacks in this country basically covered slavery and the downtrodden condition of Black people. Mr. Woodson wanted to show the shining starts that made it through that adversity in order to encourage people to strive for excellence.

How many hundreds of years later did that powerful British Empire emerge from their ruins? When the Romans gave them their freedom, how were they 50 years later?

The Romans never fully controlled what became the British Empire, and they never willingly gave it its freedom. They simply were unable to hold onto it due to greater ambitions, strength of will, and efforts of others. But it would be foolish to try to write a history of Great Britain/England or the United Kingdom without including the role the Roman Empire played in all that. It would be foolish to hold up only Anglosaxons as role models for those descended from that group and portray that as the what and who they should admire to the exclusion of all others.

I have no problem with those who live with adversity, whatever their racial or ethnic origins, to be shown a more excellent way and to be given heroes to admire and emulate. I deplore that our culture did not routinely include the contributions made to our culture by our people who happen to be black. I have no problem with identifying amazing people who have pretty well been buried in history.

My ONLY objection to Black History Month, is that I see it as once again separating people by racial group--emphasizing the difference or blackness instead of the contributions--emphasizing the need for people to be reinforced or singled out based on skin color. There is a part of me that sees that as well intended but counter productive when it separates out a large group of people and when it is used as an excuse for not doing better to include everybody in our history books to begin with.

 

[syrenn]

Thomas Sowell was mentioned, and he is my mentor, hero, and advisor when it comes to matters of race and racism. He has probably done more research and written more thought provoking commentary on the subject than any other individual.

On Black History Month (emphasis mine):



Again, elsewhere he, Shelby Steele, Morgan Freeman, and others have pointed out how the history involving black people is often missing from the history books, and of course Black History Month was implemented at least in part to combat that. But these men, who realistically see setting people apart as perpetuating the very racism it is intended to address, say we would be better served by taking a cold, hard look at what we are teaching people every day, year round. And correcting the skewed history that often exists in the textbooks.

Sowell is a smart guy, I wonder why he stated something like this:"Another big problem with Black History Month is its narrowness. You cannot understand even your own history if that is the only history you know.". Is he trying to imply that Black people don't know or study any other history than the history covered in "Black History Month"? In my opinion, one of the reasons "Black History Month" was created was the fact that people were learning about many different types of history (European, American, etc.) and that there should be additions to that history. Most of the history about Blacks in this country basically covered slavery and the downtrodden condition of Black people. Mr. Woodson wanted to show the shining starts that made it through that adversity in order to encourage people to strive for excellence.

How many hundreds of years later did that powerful British Empire emerge from their ruins? When the Romans gave them their freedom, how were they 50 years later?

The Romans never fully controlled what became the British Empire, and they never willingly gave it its freedom. They simply were unable to hold onto it due to greater ambitions, strength of will, and efforts of others. But it would be foolish to try to write a history of Great Britain/England or the United Kingdom without including the role the Roman Empire played in all that. It would be foolish to hold up only Anglosaxons as role models for those descended from that group and portray that as the what and who they should admire to the exclusion of all others.

I have no problem with those who live with adversity, whatever their racial or ethnic origins, to be shown a more excellent way and to be given heroes to admire and emulate. I deplore that our culture did not routinely include the contributions made to our culture by our people who happen to be black. I have no problem with identifying amazing people who have pretty well been buried in history.

My ONLY objection to Black History Month, is that I see it as once again separating people by racial group--emphasizing the difference or blackness instead of the contributions--emphasizing the need for people to be reinforced or singled out based on skin color. There is a part of me that sees that as well intended but counter productive when it separates out a large group of people and when it is used as an excuse for not doing better to include everybody in our history books to begin with.

if they dont want to be "judged" for being black... by that same token...they should not be recognized for "being black"

when i see an asian american month, a latin american month, a native american month a WHITE american month.... then we can talk.

 

[High_Gravity]

[MENTION=23424]syrenn[/MENTION] [MENTION=31178]MeBelle60[/MENTION] [MENTION=1322]007[/MENTION] [MENTION=26011]Ernie S.[/MENTION] [MENTION=46168]Statistikhengst[/MENTION] [MENTION=43625]Mertex[/MENTION] [MENTION=38281]Wolfsister77[/MENTION] [MENTION=26153]High_Gravity[/MENTION] [MENTION=20545]Mr. H.[/MENTION] [MENTION=22590]AquaAthena[/MENTION] [MENTION=19448]CrusaderFrank[/MENTION]

I'm on it excellent idea Sir.

 

[syrenn]

[MENTION=23424]syrenn[/MENTION] [MENTION=31178]MeBelle60[/MENTION] [MENTION=1322]007[/MENTION] [MENTION=26011]Ernie S.[/MENTION] [MENTION=46168]Statistikhengst[/MENTION] [MENTION=43625]Mertex[/MENTION] [MENTION=38281]Wolfsister77[/MENTION] [MENTION=26153]High_Gravity[/MENTION] [MENTION=20545]Mr. H.[/MENTION] [MENTION=22590]AquaAthena[/MENTION] [MENTION=19448]CrusaderFrank[/MENTION]

I'm on it excellent idea Sir.

there you are!! ive missed you!

 

[High_Gravity]

Sowell is a smart guy, I wonder why he stated something like this:"Another big problem with Black History Month is its narrowness. You cannot understand even your own history if that is the only history you know.". Is he trying to imply that Black people don't know or study any other history than the history covered in "Black History Month"? In my opinion, one of the reasons "Black History Month" was created was the fact that people were learning about many different types of history (European, American, etc.) and that there should be additions to that history. Most of the history about Blacks in this country basically covered slavery and the downtrodden condition of Black people. Mr. Woodson wanted to show the shining starts that made it through that adversity in order to encourage people to strive for excellence.

How many hundreds of years later did that powerful British Empire emerge from their ruins? When the Romans gave them their freedom, how were they 50 years later?

The Romans never fully controlled what became the British Empire, and they never willingly gave it its freedom. They simply were unable to hold onto it due to greater ambitions, strength of will, and efforts of others. But it would be foolish to try to write a history of Great Britain/England or the United Kingdom without including the role the Roman Empire played in all that. It would be foolish to hold up only Anglosaxons as role models for those descended from that group and portray that as the what and who they should admire to the exclusion of all others.

I have no problem with those who live with adversity, whatever their racial or ethnic origins, to be shown a more excellent way and to be given heroes to admire and emulate. I deplore that our culture did not routinely include the contributions made to our culture by our people who happen to be black. I have no problem with identifying amazing people who have pretty well been buried in history.

My ONLY objection to Black History Month, is that I see it as once again separating people by racial group--emphasizing the difference or blackness instead of the contributions--emphasizing the need for people to be reinforced or singled out based on skin color. There is a part of me that sees that as well intended but counter productive when it separates out a large group of people and when it is used as an excuse for not doing better to include everybody in our history books to begin with.

if they dont want to be "judged" for being black... by that same token...they should not be recognized for "being black"

when i see an asian american month, a latin american month, a native american month a WHITE american month.... then we can talk.

They actually do have Asian, Latin and Native American history months. They have some for white people such as Irish, Italian etc etc

National Hispanic American Heritage Month 2013
Asian Heritage Month
Native American Heritage Month 2013

 

[High_Gravity]

[MENTION=23424]syrenn[/MENTION] [MENTION=31178]MeBelle60[/MENTION] [MENTION=1322]007[/MENTION] [MENTION=26011]Ernie S.[/MENTION] [MENTION=46168]Statistikhengst[/MENTION] [MENTION=43625]Mertex[/MENTION] [MENTION=38281]Wolfsister77[/MENTION] [MENTION=26153]High_Gravity[/MENTION] [MENTION=20545]Mr. H.[/MENTION] [MENTION=22590]AquaAthena[/MENTION] [MENTION=19448]CrusaderFrank[/MENTION]

I'm on it excellent idea Sir.

there you are!! ive missed you!

Busy as hell with the new job hon.

 

[syrenn]

I'm on it excellent idea Sir.

there you are!! ive missed you!

Busy as hell with the new job hon.

oh no you dont....thats no excuse.... you just dont love me anymore....

 

[High_Gravity]

there you are!! ive missed you!

Busy as hell with the new job hon.

oh no you dont....thats no excuse.... you just dont love me anymore....

lol I'm busy as heck with all this training, hopefully once it settles down I can be on more.

 

[Unkotare]

emphasizing the need for people to be reinforced or singled out based on skin color. .

That's kinda the point though, isn't it? For so long certain people were (are?) singled out in negative ways based on skin color. If that had never been the case...

 

[Unkotare]

I'm busy as heck with all this training, hopefully once it settles down I can be on more.

And just think about how much money you'll save on diapers!

 

[oldfart]

Again, elsewhere he, Shelby Steele, Morgan Freeman, and others have pointed out how the history involving black people is often missing from the history books, and of course Black History Month was implemented at least in part to combat that. But these men, who realistically see setting people apart as perpetuating the very racism it is intended to address, say we would be better served by taking a cold, hard look at what we are teaching people every day, year round. And correcting the skewed history that often exists in the textbooks.

In the mid 70s I was marginally involved in the development of a Mississippi history text written by two white professors, one from a black college and one from a white college (not Ol' Miss, the one that has the Mississippi Alpha Chapter of Phi Beta Kappa). It took a seven year legal battle to force the state to allow it to be used in public schools. It did however win several awards and is the only reasonably balanced textbook in the field. The primary author went on to become an expert on bias in history textbooks and a bestselling author (the "Lies my Teacher Told Me" series).

You see, America does not want what really happened to be taught in public schools. High school level textbooks are not written by historians, they are written by "experts" on history for high school students. This assures that the texts will comply with all of the understood rules about what can and cannot be put in them. Americans want a book of socially useful myths which can be approved by the Texas School Textbook Board. These books contain as much fantasy as history, but remain the basis of what is taught. Most secondary school history teachers are not trained in history at all (a third are coaches). It's rare to find one with a degree in history (as opposed to a secondary education major with only the general education requirement of actual history courses).

What passes for history in our schools is far removed from history be it black, white, Asian or First Nations. For an example, just check out the History Forum thread on Eisenhower.

 

[Unkotare]

Most secondary school history teachers are not trained in history at all ...

Link?

 

[Foxfyre]

Again, elsewhere he, Shelby Steele, Morgan Freeman, and others have pointed out how the history involving black people is often missing from the history books, and of course Black History Month was implemented at least in part to combat that. But these men, who realistically see setting people apart as perpetuating the very racism it is intended to address, say we would be better served by taking a cold, hard look at what we are teaching people every day, year round. And correcting the skewed history that often exists in the textbooks.

In the mid 70s I was marginally involved in the development of a Mississippi history text written by two white professors, one from a black college and one from a white college (not Ol' Miss, the one that has the Mississippi Alpha Chapter of Phi Beta Kappa). It took a seven year legal battle to force the state to allow it to be used in public schools. It did however win several awards and is the only reasonably balanced textbook in the field. The primary author went on to become an expert on bias in history textbooks and a bestselling author (the "Lies my Teacher Told Me" series).

You see, America does not want what really happened to be taught in public schools. High school level textbooks are not written by historians, they are written by "experts" on history for high school students. This assures that the texts will comply with all of the understood rules about what can and cannot be put in them. Americans want a book of socially useful myths which can be approved by the Texas School Textbook Board. These books contain as much fantasy as history, but remain the basis of what is taught. Most secondary school history teachers are not trained in history at all (a third are coaches). It's rare to find one with a degree in history (as opposed to a secondary education major with only the general education requirement of actual history courses).

What passes for history in our schools is far removed from history be it black, white, Asian or First Nations. For an example, just check out the History Forum thread on Eisenhower.

I was privileged to serve on a school board for awhile. And because I sometimes volunteered at the public library and gave some limited lectures there, and because I pretty much completed a history minor in college, I was deemed the only one sufficiently credentialed to head up the history text book approval group. And even back then, when things were better than now, the content of the history textbooks was appalling. We picked the best of the offerings, but we were blessed with some gifted teachers willing to write and teach their own stuff, and we gave them pretty full rein to do that. Not only did most of the kids excel in history, but it oozed into other areas requiring critical comprehension and reasoning with very positive results.

It is unfortunate that so much of what passes for education these days is in fact more indoctrination than education. And that doesn't happen in many areas more than it happens in 'black' studies and 'black' history. And even with my background, I didn't realize how true that was until I started seriously reading some of Thomas Sowell's and others' works.

 

[BDBoop]

Very strange, I can't do an image search on her for some reason. Just keeps going to "about:blank" ... maybe if I save it, reduce the size, try again? I don't know. Frustrating.

 

[Asclepias]

Very strange, I can't do an image search on her for some reason. Just keeps going to "about:blank" ... maybe if I save it, reduce the size, try again? I don't know. Frustrating.

I tried and it just keeps coming up with Bantu Knots hairstyles. She is probably a model but I cant find her name.

Berlin Hair Baby: The Great Big Bantu Knot Debacle

 

[Pheonixops]

Again, elsewhere he, Shelby Steele, Morgan Freeman, and others have pointed out how the history involving black people is often missing from the history books, and of course Black History Month was implemented at least in part to combat that. But these men, who realistically see setting people apart as perpetuating the very racism it is intended to address, say we would be better served by taking a cold, hard look at what we are teaching people every day, year round. And correcting the skewed history that often exists in the textbooks.

In the mid 70s I was marginally involved in the development of a Mississippi history text written by two white professors, one from a black college and one from a white college (not Ol' Miss, the one that has the Mississippi Alpha Chapter of Phi Beta Kappa). It took a seven year legal battle to force the state to allow it to be used in public schools. It did however win several awards and is the only reasonably balanced textbook in the field. The primary author went on to become an expert on bias in history textbooks and a bestselling author (the "Lies my Teacher Told Me" series).

You see, America does not want what really happened to be taught in public schools. High school level textbooks are not written by historians, they are written by "experts" on history for high school students. This assures that the texts will comply with all of the understood rules about what can and cannot be put in them. Americans want a book of socially useful myths which can be approved by the Texas School Textbook Board. These books contain as much fantasy as history, but remain the basis of what is taught. Most secondary school history teachers are not trained in history at all (a third are coaches). It's rare to find one with a degree in history (as opposed to a secondary education major with only the general education requirement of actual history courses).

What passes for history in our schools is far removed from history be it black, white, Asian or First Nations. For an example, just check out the History Forum thread on Eisenhower.

I was privileged to serve on a school board for awhile. And because I sometimes volunteered at the public library and gave some limited lectures there, and because I pretty much completed a history minor in college, I was deemed the only one sufficiently credentialed to head up the history text book approval group. And even back then, when things were better than now, the content of the history textbooks was appalling. We picked the best of the offerings, but we were blessed with some gifted teachers willing to write and teach their own stuff, and we gave them pretty full rein to do that. Not only did most of the kids excel in history, but it oozed into other areas requiring critical comprehension and reasoning with very positive results.

It is unfortunate that so much of what passes for education these days is in fact more indoctrination than education. And that doesn't happen in many areas more than it happens in 'black' studies and 'black' history. And even with my background, I didn't realize how true that was until I started seriously reading some of Thomas Sowell's and others' works.

Can you please cite some examples?

 

[BDBoop]

Wow! Who is that?

I don't know but she definitely brings a warm feeling to Black history. Absolutely breathtaking.

I found her!!! Good lord if that didn't take some SERIOUS digging. She is a 22 y/o New York model named Brianna Michelle.

http://iambriannamichelle.com/

I found her on the modelmayhem.com site, figured somebody was just using her pic, but no - it actually is her.

ModelMayhem.com - Brianna Michelle - Model - Brooklyn, New York, US

The picture you found is on the main page, and you click through to her page. She's on the right-hand side, I hit page down eight times, and she was at the top (the very picture we were searching for here.)

I love detective work!!

/injured, patting self on back with both hands

//whimper

 

[BDBoop]

Here's another beautimous picture of her.