Abe Lincoln @ 199

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by PhiGam

And 200 years ago Abe Lincoln wouldn't have considered Obama a person either... whats your point?

In the most SIMPLEST way possible....the US has come a long way since the 1800's, and it felt good to be able to go out and vote, (something that you yourself is taking for granted since you have said that you more than likely won't vote) and of all possible days a 'celebrated' president's birthday who some say, was responsible for freeing a non indigenous people...people in Kenya have died and are dying today in the 21st century for that right.

That, in part is my point.

[PhiGam]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

In the most SIMPLEST way possible....the US has come a long way since the 1800's, and it felt good to be able to go out and vote, (something that you yourself is taking for granted since you have said that you more than likely won't vote) and of all possible days a 'celebrated' president's birthday who some say, was responsible for freeing a non indigenous people...people in Kenya have died and are dying today in the 21st century for that right.

That, in part is my point.

I am going to vote- just not for president.

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by PhiGam

I am going to vote- just not for president.

You do realize that you have the option of a write in, right?

[PhiGam]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

You do realize that you have the option of a write in, right?

I also realize that not voting would have the same effect.

[DSTCHAOS]

I'm more interested in how DaemonSeid edited "all men are created equal" but never questioned why it still reads "men" as if that is the neutral gender standard.

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

I'm more interested in how DaemonSeid edited "all men are created equal" but never questioned why it still reads "men" as if that is the neutral gender standard.

DST...I didn't edit it at all....

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

DST...I didn't edit it at all....

I was talking about this:

As a nation, we began by declaring that "all men are created equal." We now practically read it "all men are created equal, except negroes." When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read "all men are created equal, except negroes, and foreigners, and catholics."

I probably misunderstood what the heck you were talking about there, overall, but I see the gender neutral standard there is clear as day.

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

I was talking about this:

As a nation, we began by declaring that "all men are created equal." We now practically read it "all men are created equal, except negroes." When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read "all men are created equal, except negroes, and foreigners, and catholics."

I probably misunderstood what the heck you were talking about there, overall, but I see the gender neutral standard there is clear as day.

Right, but that is not my original thought....that is what is taken from the link I provided

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

Right, but that is not my original thought....that is what is taken from the link I provided

Oh that was an Abe Lincoln quote?

OK.

I agree that you didn't do a great job of sparking discussion with this. Did you just want to acknowledge change or something?

[DSTCHAOS]

Sidebar:
Unfortunately, the great Frederick Douglass follower, Booker T. Washington also used slurs and negative portrayals of blacks to gain white support. His excuse was that he needed to align himself with whites so the larger cause of economic independence and the Tuskegee Institute could be met. While Douglass was also a former slave and uber-assimilationist, he did not believe in demeaning his people for the larger cause.

Douglass and Washington both provide some great insights on progressiveness, that I think should be combined with approaches such as Du Bois that aren't assimilationist. Just providing historical context for why things sometimes happen the way they do. Change is half about great visionaries and half about the context in which change is both demanded and possible.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

Just providing historical context for why things sometimes happen the way they do. Change is half about great visionaries and half about the context in which change is both demanded and possible.

This is a much more interesting discussion, in my mind, than the OP (if only b/c the OP was vague and didn't really foster much besides "look how far we've come"; no offense intended, DS) - contextualizing the work of the great visionaries can be incredibly difficult, because it is often viewed as denigrating their work by those who revere the visionary. However, I think it's important to realize that no change happens in a vacuum - Frederick Douglass shaped his world, but he was shaped by it as well, and his audience had to receive the message in the same way that he had to send it.

I don't mean to be glib, but perception is very much reality on these issues - maybe that is the real connection between historical heroes in the civil rights movement and the candidacy of Barack Obama: they are creating perceptual changes on a more powerful level than any before, while also benefiting from perceptual changes and openness that may not have been available to those before.

I realize this is sort of a lame "walking on the shoulders of giants"-type of intellectual onanism, but I think it goes beyond that. I think the one of the great skills of visionaries is the ability to find subtle points of attack and subtle changes in perception, then exploit those changes for the greater benefit. Timing is a talent, and perhaps the most important talent when it comes to glacial societal change.

[DSTCHAOS]

It isn't lame to acknowledge that there are those before you who made change possible. People forget that time is a continuous, meaning that change began over a century ago and, while that seems distant, the ball had to get rolling somewhere.

Tangent:
My problem with the trendy excitement over Obama and Clinton is that people are looking for a quick fix. As if SUDDENLY there is going to be change because THEY are in office. That's not how substantial change occurs. Sure, there may be new legislation and economic shifts but the effect of those can easily be buffered by other social, cultural, and economic factors. And what happens if change doesn't happen as quickly or to the magnitude that lazy Americans expected? People will complain but they won't find other ways to work toward change.

I don't know who I am voting for but it annoys me when people are asked why they support Obama (or voted for him in the primary) and all they can say is "well...I want change...it's time for change." That's vague and catch phrasy. There has to be more than that. Whichever candidate wins should not give people an excuse to become complacent and not push for change somehow. There are no quick fixes.

[DSTCHAOS]

Do better with multiple quotes next time, DaemonSeid.

[DSTCHAOS]

Was there confusion?

The larger context is that the establishment and continuation of slavery has an economic basis and so does the abolishment of slavery. Slavery wasn't really abolished on a moral or religious basis of "it is unhumane/unChristian to treat nonwhites this way" just as slavery didn't begin because slave sellers and owners had nothing better to do than hate and target nonwhites.

This context serves as the context for denying blacks the right to vote and other exclusionary tactics that exist in de facto and covert forms today.

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

Was there confusion?

The larger context is that the establishment and continuation of slavery has an economic basis and so does the abolishment of slavery. Slavery wasn't really abolished on a moral or religious basis of "it is unhumane/unChristian to treat nonwhites this way" just as slavery didn't begin because slave sellers and owners had nothing better to do than hate and target nonwhites.

This context serves as the context for denying blacks the right to vote and other exclusionary tactics that exist in more de facto and covert forms today.

Trying to clear the confusion of whether or not I was celebrating Lincoln vs showing how he felt about Black voting rights then vs the event of what happened 2 days ago.

I actually wished I had that quote to use in the OP.