Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You are confusing the term 'lynching' with the battles and raids by both sides during Reconstruction. Go study the period from 1865 to 1876. What you want to call lynchings were not in the traditional sense of the word. Get a copy of Kevin M. Schultz's Hist Vol II from 1865, and read chapter 16 very carefully, or any other text books of the last twenty years that deals with Reconstruction. Your video show is not history.
You are confusing the term 'lynching' with the battles and raids by both sides during Reconstruction. Go study the period from 1865 to 1876. What you want to call lynchings were not in the traditional sense of the word. Get a copy of Kevin M. Schultz's Hist Vol II from 1865, and read chapter 16 very carefully, or any other text books of the last twenty years that deals with Reconstruction. Your video show is not history.
Yeah ...ok the history didn't stop at 1865, and I seem to remember you not understanding the 3/5th clause in the Constitution, yet you presume to tell me what I don't know? Please.
You are confusing the term 'lynching' with the battles and raids by both sides during Reconstruction. Go study the period from 1865 to 1876. What you want to call lynchings were not in the traditional sense of the word. Get a copy of Kevin M. Schultz's Hist Vol II from 1865, and read chapter 16 very carefully, or any other text books of the last twenty years that deals with Reconstruction. Your video show is not history.
Yeah ...ok the history didn't stop at 1865, and I seem to remember you not understanding the 3/5th clause in the Constitution, yet you presume to tell me what I don't know? Please.
Please read what I wrote above.
And, yes, 3/5ths clause granted the southern states increased representation in congress in return for agreeing to import tariffs that the southerners would later scream about.
mdn2000 states that Zinn and Chomsky should not be used in history class, but won't tell us, but he wants me to refudiate his position.
If he can't support it, I don't have to rebut it.
Guns and Roses, at least, is trying to say 'why' instead of making an assertion that calling on others to tell him why he is wrong. If he tried that in college, he would fail. If he tried that in business, he would be terminated. If he tried that in the military, he would be court martialed or given nonjudicial administrative punishment.
Defend your assertion, mdn2000, or you have lost. No one who understands how discussion works is going to defend your approach.
Yes, lynchings occurred after Reconstruction until the 1950s. More than 5,000 happened, about 85% of the were African American.
Yes, lynchings occurred after Reconstruction until the 1950s. More than 5,000 happened, about 85% of the were African American.
ok..I don't believe there were any white Democrats lynched, but there were 1300 white Republicans Lynched, so I guess that says something.... doesn't it
there's more to history than just facts and dates.
Really? so then teachers should push their ideological views on the kids?
there's more to history than just facts and dates.
Really? so then teachers should push their ideological views on the kids?
Teachers are taught to push their ideological agenda by Liberals and Marxist. Not only teachers but workers inside the government, simple jobs you would not even consider like a Librarian are told to advance the ideology at work, by the selection of books for instance, by choosing which books to be taken off the shelf.
Marxist and Liberals actively instruct other Marxist and Liberals within government to use their position to advance the ideology of Marxism or Liberalism.
Fantastic, huh. To tell you the truth, this morning I had never thought of this but this afternoon its clear.
Really? so then teachers should push their ideological views on the kids?
Teachers are taught to push their ideological agenda by Liberals and Marxist. Not only teachers but workers inside the government, simple jobs you would not even consider like a Librarian are told to advance the ideology at work, by the selection of books for instance, by choosing which books to be taken off the shelf.
Marxist and Liberals actively instruct other Marxist and Liberals within government to use their position to advance the ideology of Marxism or Liberalism.
Fantastic, huh. To tell you the truth, this morning I had never thought of this but this afternoon its clear.
All sides do it, mdn2000, and indoctrination is wrong. It's not the marxists (by the way, you know, don't you, that libs are not marxies any more than cons are not nazis?) who call for 'To Kill a Mockingbird' or 'Huck Finn' to be removed from libraries.
If we had teachers at the schools here who were indoctrinating libertarian, or Republican, or Democratic, or communist, or whatever, I guarantee you they would not be rehired for the following year.
You have not made a case for Zinn or Chomsky. When you do, I will respond.
You fail intellectually and morally to call for rebuttal to an assertion without support. If you did this in the Army, you would be disciplined; if you did it in a business meeting, you would be counseled or fired; if you did this in a college presentation, you would fail.
Give your evidence.
Really? so then teachers should push their ideological views on the kids?
Teachers are taught to push their ideological agenda by Liberals and Marxist. Not only teachers but workers inside the government, simple jobs you would not even consider like a Librarian are told to advance the ideology at work, by the selection of books for instance, by choosing which books to be taken off the shelf.
Marxist and Liberals actively instruct other Marxist and Liberals within government to use their position to advance the ideology of Marxism or Liberalism.
Fantastic, huh. To tell you the truth, this morning I had never thought of this but this afternoon its clear.
All sides do it, mdn2000, and indoctrination is wrong. It's not the marxists (by the way, you know, don't you, that libs are not marxies any more than cons are not nazis?) who call for 'To Kill a Mockingbird' or 'Huck Finn' to be removed from libraries.
If we had teachers at the schools here who were indoctrinating libertarian, or Republican, or Democratic, or communist, or whatever, I guarantee you they would not be rehired for the following year.
SECRECY, ARCHIVES, AND THE PUBLIC INTEREST
HOWARD ZINN
Let me work my way in from the great circle of the world to us at the center by discussing, in turn, three things: the social role of the professional in modern times; the scholar in the United States today; and the archivist here and now.
Professionalism is a powerful form of social control. By professionalism I mean the almost total immersion in one's craft, being so absorbed in the day-to-day exercise of those skills, as to have little time, energy, or will to consider what part those skills play in the total social scheme
..........................................................
By social control I mean maintaining things as they are, preserving traditional arrangements, preventing any sharp change in how the society distributes wealth and power.
There were few professionals in the old days. Now they are everywhere, and their skills, their knowledge, could be a threat to the status quo. But their will to challenge the going order is constantly weakened by rewards of money and position. And they are so divided, so preoccupied with their particular specialities, as to spend most of
their time smoothing, tightening their tiny piece of linkage in the social machine. This leaves very little time or energy to worry about whether the machine is designed for war or peace, for social need or individual profits, to help us or to poison us.
......................................
Equally important for social control as the military scientists are those professionals who are connected with the dissemination of knowledge in society: the teachers, the historians, the political scientists, the. journalists, and yes, the archivists
.....................
However, if any of these specialists in the accumulation and dissemination of knowledge were to walk over to another part of the playpen, the one marked political sociology, and read Karl Mannheim, who in Ideology and Utopia, points out following Marx, of course, but it is more prudent to cite Mannheim)( that knowledge has a social origin and a social use. It comes out of a divided, embattled world, and is poured into such a world. It is not neutral either in origin or effect. It reflects the bias of a particular social order; more accurately, it reflects the diverse biases of a diverse social order, but with one important qualification: that those with the most power and wealth in society will dominate the field of knowledge, so that it serves their interests. The scholar may swear to his neutrality on the job, but whether he be physicist, historian, or archivist, his work will tend, in this theory, to maintain the existing social order by perpetuating its values, by legitimizing its priorities, by justifying its wars, perpetuating its prejudices, contributing to its xenophobia, and apologizing for its class order
...........................
Now maybe we have not been oblivious to this idea that the professional scholars in any society tend to buttress the existing social order and values of that society. But we have tended to attribute this to other societies, or other times or other professions. Not the United States. Not now. Not here. Not us. It was easy to detect the control of the German scholars or the Russian scholars-but much harder to recognize that the high school texts of our own country have fostered jingoism, war heroes, the Sambo approach to the black man, the vision of the Indian as savage, and the notion that white Western Civilization is the cultural, humanistic summit of man's time on earth.
You have not made a case for Zinn or Chomsky. When you do, I will respond.
You fail intellectually and morally to call for rebuttal to an assertion without support. If you did this in the Army, you would be disciplined; if you did it in a business meeting, you would be counseled or fired; if you did this in a college presentation, you would fail.
Give your evidence.
If I did this in the military, lets try and see, "Private Jake, come here now, Private Jake do you support this, yes or no, Private Jake, this is a direct order, Private Jake I charge you with conduct unbecoming and refusing an order from a non commissioned officer. "
Looks like you lose Jake.
Business meeting lets see, "Jake, do you support using the new technical manual, yes or no," seems you lose again Jake.
So now I must assume, Jake supports using Howard Zinn as a primary source to teach History.
Is that correct Jake, you support using Howard Zinn.
If I did this in a College presentation, now you have gone off the very deep end Jake, first you call me Hitler, now you compare a simple comment as something someone would do at a College presentation.
Is that your argument.
Jake, your are laughable, you are fighting for Howard Zinn, why do you like Howard Zinn Jake.
You can't post an argument against Zinn. Your claim, bud, defend it.
Thank you for finally posting an argument about Zinn, even if you don't understand it. Now you could have boiled it down and tell us what the article is saying, but I will do it for you.
Zinn states the marxist observation that entrenched social orders, in America's case he means the wealthy and powerful, will use teachers and professors to enhance their position. I am sure this is true in America, was true in USSR, is true in China, and is true in Iran. Extending the concept then, the scholar and teacher in America must be on guard against parroting the agenda-driven activism of the far left and the far right. In other words, the American teacher must be on guard against the lies of the far left and the far right.
Right now I am in library school, training to be an archivist, so I'm posting this speech that Howard Zinn made about the archivist profession which has really inspired me. Lately the idea of taking a political position within the profession is something that I have been thinking about a lot
Those in the archivist profession should fight for open access to information, and to protect and make accessible materials documenting the histories of people that have traditionally been silenced and marginalized. I think Zinn's speech is just as relevant today as it is when he presented it and it was published in the 1970s. We still live in an age of information secrecy and repression, and corporate ownership. Simultaneously the Internet has made it possible for people to spread information on a massive scale whether it is classified documents or a bootlegged movie. Ignoring intellectual property rights may be viewed as an act of rebellion, even though the average person may not consciously think about the act of file sharing as a form of resistance. The degree to which archivists participate in acts of resistance is something I wish to explore further.
Thank you for finally posting an argument about Zinn, even if you don't understand it. Now you could have boiled it down and tell us what the article is saying, but I will do it for you.
Zinn states the marxist observation that entrenched social orders, in America's case he means the wealthy and powerful, will use teachers and professors to enhance their position. I am sure this is true in America, was true in USSR, is true in China, and is true in Iran. Extending the concept then, the scholar and teacher in America must be on guard against parroting the agenda-driven activism of the far left and the far right. In other words, the American teacher must be on guard against the lies of the far left and the far right.
We know that you are mischaracterizing my understanding of the speech and Zinn.First and foremost Jake you demonstrate you have no understanding of what I posted,
An ineffective and deceitful tactic by both the far right and the far left.this is not an article, had you followed the link you could of seen it was speech. Jake, I posted only a part of the speech.
Again you lie. Show where I defended marxism above. Show us where I suggested "Zinn was far from a Marxist".Jake has a preconcieved idea as to my motives, even now, your defending Marxism, showing how Zinn was far from a Marxist when I have not asserted that Zinn is a Marxsit.
<snip: this is irrelevant until mdn2000 admits his lies and corrects his statements>
We need good archivists, and I am sure that your instructors will counsel you about the profession carefully.Right now I am in library school, training to be an archivist, so I'm posting this speech that Howard Zinn made about the archivist profession which has really inspired me. Lately the idea of taking a political position within the profession is something that I have been thinking about a lot
1. It's good that you are finally posting attempts to support your premises. 2. Correct you lies or show where I have done what you have accused me of doing.
What is this person's Political Ideology. That becomes a very important point. This is about Zinn, Jake I hope you do not think I wish to define Zinn with just one speech or article that Zinn wrote.
<snip: unimportant?
Those in the archivist profession should fight for open access to information, and to protect and make accessible materials documenting the histories of people that have traditionally been silenced and marginalized. I think Zinn's speech is just as relevant today as it is when he presented it and it was published in the 1970s. We still live in an age of information secrecy and repression, and corporate ownership. Simultaneously the Internet has made it possible for people to spread information on a massive scale whether it is classified documents or a bootlegged movie. Ignoring intellectual property rights may be viewed as an act of rebellion, even though the average person may not consciously think about the act of file sharing as a form of resistance. The degree to which archivists participate in acts of resistance is something I wish to explore further.
