Marion Post Wolcott/Library of Congress
Going to the movies at an (of course) integrated theater in Belzoni, Mississippi, in 1939. Belzoni has no movie theater today.
In response to that post about why there's no movie theater in this post-integration Mississippi town, @BeverlyC writes:
The same thing happened in my mid-Atlantic medium size city. After the "riots" following the MLK assassination, all the worst fears of white folks were suddenly reality. All the downtown theaters closed, all the department stores and 5&10's shuttered. Malls in the suburbs had private security forces that could control and eject the unwelcome. Our beautiful art deco library on the downtown square became inaccessible -- and my parents wouldn't allow us kids to take the bus there anyway. The city was dangerous and we never went there anymore. Gentrification of the outskirts helped a little, but the center of the city lost its heart. Attempts are being made to reclaim some of the old structures and re-infuse life into the main streets, but the affluent suburbanites (white and black) seem not a little disinterested.
And this from @pezdrake:
Eufala, AL has a beautiful old theater that had the same issue. When there I asked my friend from the town about why it wasnt' in operation any more. "No one wanted to go there after integration." "Wasn't that like forty years ago?"I asked. She shrugged. "I guess."
Two more responses -- including an important, thoughtful dissent -- after the jump.
@Downriverlady adds this:
I grew up in Detroit and that same mindset is still in force today. Once it became obvious that equal access was not just a fad, that change was here to stay, the new plan was to move your business out and leave for the suburbs. Public pools shut down, movie theaters, schools shut down, stores left and it became vogue to leave town and brag about how many years it had been since you last stepped foot in the city. Neighborhoods changed overnight, literally. In a way it was kind of funny, if you wanted to live in all white area, all a black family had to do was visit any real estate Open house in that area and wait a week. For sale signs would pop up like weeds all over, from one sign to a couple of dozen. It was called Block Busting. A smart agent would make a fortune by hinting that Blacks were looking to move in. And this was all before the riot, before MLK marched here. We could start class in our new school on a Monday with only 4 Black kids and within that week there would be 20. Go to bed with white neighbors next door and wake up with black ones in the morning. No joke.
Or maybe it's just the march of progress, so to speak. @John writes:
I don't wish to diminish or disclaim race and racism because it is a very important factor in American Culture. It's critical to understand it's role in the development of our country, especially as it relates to things like the article mentions.
It's also important to understand that technology and prosperity drove many of the changes as well. People did "give up on public places" as our culture changed to value privacy more than community. (Thanks, to a large degree, on the automobile) This happened along side of whites not wanting to integrate, especially in the south. So it's difficult to say "this is why" or "that is why"...because it's a whole mess of cultural/sociological changes happening at the same time.
While it is lamentable that there is no public theater, that's mode of entertainment has been dieing for decades, slowly going the way of "drive-in movies," replaced by home theaters. Speaking personally, I'd rather watch a movie, at home, in widescreen HD, with surround sound. The "theater experience" is over-rated these days, with all the rude people, and high prices.
Leave a Comment:
interestingly enough, i think every one of those people above make valid points.
There are bigots in a northern state? Say it ain't so! How will they maintain their smug sense of superiority?
I think there is a big difference between those two regions in that there is a more pervasive culture of racism in the south. There is racism everywhere unfortunately. It's because there are ignorant people everywhere. I mean, look at how many people vote Republican. Ignorance abounds in this country.
So you're ignorant if you vote Republican?
I've lived all over this country--NJ, OH, CA, TX, FL and NC. The stratification of the society is most notable in NC (although I have been here the longest). The racism and classism is more overt and in practice of any place I have ever lived. SanityClause is correct in a sense, just that the racists in the south are out in the open. Which is worse?
So you're ignorant if you vote Republican? Look who's talking.
Covah, what are you blathering about? I asked a question.
And I answered it. Tell us again how fascists are "extreme left".
I didn't hear an answer to the question.
Tell us again Mark about the "liberal icon Margaret Sanger".
Since when is Sanger a "liberal icon"?
I posted some more on her on the other post. Hillary Clinton won the Margaret Sanger award, that should say enough.
None of Mark's quotes show Sanger as a "liberal icon".
I'd have to disagree, vehemently, with formerroadie... having spent a decent amount of time living in the South, the North, the West, Europe... I can say that the "culture of racism" is JUST AS pervasive in the northern states as it is in the southern states. The primary difference being that there is a MUCH larger population of Black Americans not centralized in big cities in the southern states. That is to say, the culture is just as strong in both areas, it's just that the demographic breakdown is such that the two groups, essentially CAN'T self-segregate as effectively in the South...
This, from an Asian American.
@Covah- why would her own quotes describe her as a liberal icon. Of course they wouldn't, but your extreme love for her would say otherwise. I'm just playing with you.
There are still some great theater experiences to be had, and people like to get out and go somewhere and then have an ice cream or coffee and pie after. However, modern movies are pretty crappy, for the most part.
I think we do have a lingering race problem in this country, but it has evolved.
We're poised to go into a new era, but how we resolve the education situation will be critical. Access to the good jobs will depend on education. In order to get people out of poverty, we have to have a place for them to go, in other words, a middle class. Squeezing the middle class blocks the poor out. It also pits groups against one another just as it did in the Jim Crow south.
Exactly, and the conservatives are doing everything they possibly can to create a large poor, uneducated class made up of the descendents of former middle class families.
Formerroadie, I'd like to suggest an alternative for your assesment. I see the conservatives wanting to build a REALLY large, but uneducated work force. (Some things never change) So my question to Anthony Wiener this morning was "What would a bunch of conservatives want to do with this REALLY large, but uneducated work force, once it's built?" (.....or really large uneducated "army" )
@ Randy, they wouldn't, it doesn't make any sense. The more educated you are the more likely you are to vote Republican. If they hold everyone down, they're effectively handing over the populous to the Democrats. Then they'd lose any influence that they have.
"The more educated you are the more likely you are to vote Republican."
Evidence?
"The more educated you are the more likely you are to vote Republican."
- I have heard of making up stuff, but this is just getting out of control. I do remember a map of the US comparing intelligence (IQ level average by population) by state and comparing that to a map of the US during the civil war. It was one of the most eye opening things I have ever seen, as the similarities between the map of IQ almost mirrored the map of the split US during the civil war (with the blue states up north being higher IQ than the red states down south).
Here is a link to the 2004 election by IQ - http://zombietime.com/iq_of_2004_voters_by_state/
And this link has a TON of maps, some helpful, some just downright funny:
http://www.thesodajerks.com/jerks/2004map.html
Covah, it has been proven that the more educated someone is, the more likely they are to vote. Everyone here states "factually" that there Republican party is vastly outnumbered by the Democratic party. If that's the case, and elections usually come out close to even, then there must be more educated Republicans than Democrats. Otherwise, Republicans could never win elections. Additionally Democrats consider the poor and middle class their base. Republicans consider the middle class and the wealthy to be theirs. There is a positive correlation to education level and income.
Exactly Eap. The uneducated need all help the dems promise. Poor people are usually uneducated which means they vote for the libs. I have a college degree and vote republican, and I'm poor!
@eap1 - you are SO completely wrong on this fact, it is almost not laughable. Please click on those links I put up (which show the lower the IQ of the state, the more likely to vote for a Republican), and explain to me - with proof - how you come up with your hypothesis. I especially love how you equate riches with education level (which is a factor, but not the most important factor).
CLAIM: "Everyone here states 'factually' that there Republican party is vastly outnumbered by the Democratic party"
- Fact: There are more registered Democrats in the US than Republicans
(show in 2000 there were 67 million Dems registered, 47 million Repubs
I am not going to waste any more time researching links to prove the facts that I already know to be true and you seem to have flip-flopped. To answer the burning question you didn't write, but were inferring "Why don't the Democrats win every election if they have such larger numbers?" - We can only guess, but I would assume turnout is a big factor (if not the biggest) as well as the wishy-washy independents who tend to alternate their votes each election cycle.
@Mark - just because you vote GOP and have a college degree doesn't mean everyone does, or even a majority of people. Forget about the FACTS, which show that higher IQ equates to a higher likelihood of voting for a Democrat.
No one screws middle class and wealthy more than Republicans. Who is going to pay off the 14 trillion in debt? Not me or you. The joke's on them. What a bunch of suckers.
Republican party is "vastly" outnumbered by the Democratic party? No, they are about even. Dr. Maddow points out that slightly more electorate are Democrats but of those who actually vote slightly more are Republicans. I suspect agitprop right-wing radio and TV propels Republicans to the polls. Also many are leisure-class voters. Compare 2008 Democratic landslide to 2010 Republican House wipe-out. Obviously different people are voting, that is, Dems said "we won" in 2008 and stayed home in 2010. Wingers, watch out for 2012!
"Republicans could never win elections." That's about right. Republican majorities have been slim or none. In 1998 the Senate was 55 to 45 and the House 223 vs 206 but popular disgust at Republican impeachment of Clinton wiped out Republican majority in Senate, retained small majority in the House of 221 v 212 and Bush lost the popular vote in 2000. The 9/11 attack gave slogan-spewing Republicans a boost in 2004 back to 55 in Senate and a slim victory for Bush but Republicans lost House and Senate in the 2006 midterm and lost the presidency in 2008.
It is always a miracle to me how Republicans are able to pull off outrageous crimes with such little popular backing and with the help of a handful of spineless Democrat doormats. This is matched by the equally miraculous Democratic failure to govern even with enormous mandate.
Republicans are able to play any catastrophe to their own benefit. The Kennedy assassination put Republicans into office then they screwed up and Reagan played THAT screw-up to his benefit. Watching Republicans play 9/11 for political gain was disgusting to me and millions of other Americans. Now watch them play the debt they created for votes.
I've never had my IQ test taken. So it can't all be facts Bolbis.
@ Bolbis, you just proved my point. There are more Democrats, the more educated someone is, the more likely they are to vote, therefore the must be a higher level of education in Republicans. Pretty basic if you ask me.
@Covah, really? Who's paying for the poor's welfare? Who's paying for unemployment. I'm sure you'll say the middle class because you don't think the rich pay enough taxes. If that's the case, who's really screwing the middle class? I guess that'd have to be the Democrats now wouldn't it.
Do you really think it's only the Republicans that use a catastrophe for their benefit? If so, you need to put down the cool aid. Everyone does that.
Do you guys all have jobs, or boring jobs like me where we can just comment on here all day if we wanted?
"there must be a higher level of education in Republicans"
Therefore universities are hotbeds of conservatism?
"Who's paying for the poor's welfare?" Only 6% of the federal budget goes for needs-based entitlements while 35% goes to military.
http://www.infoplease.com/cig/economics/government-share-economy.html
This chart includes Social Security and Medicare which are funded separately- FICA- which is shown as 35% or just over a third. Removing FICA would increase the graph by a third, increasing needs-based entitlements by a third to 8%. That would increase military budget by a third as well, from 35 to over 45%. Please try harder to get your priorities straight.
Everyone receives entitlements even those who are too dumb to know it. Rich people receive the most entitlements because they are rich.
Who's paying for unemployment? Unemployment insurance is included in FICA.
eap1, no, no. Sorry, that wasn't my point at all. What I was referring to was a combination of 2 factors. The conservative stance on the defense of DOMA and their stance on Pro-Life (anti-abortion) legislation. Between these to "big ones", they must me looking for a large increase in popluation..and since the upper to middle class are having fewer children, on average, the vast majority of newborns would be from the lower middle class to the poverty line. I wasn't referring to race, IQ, Republican or Democrat. Sorry if I was misunderstood.
@ Covah, those who can, do. Those who can't, teach.
I never said I don't want to cut military spending. Good job by the way of cherry picking out the numbers you want in that pie chart. Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are entitlements. All together it's almost 50%. By the way, why don't you find some more current information. That's almost a decade old.
I don't receive any entitlements. Tell me what I get if you think I do.
What entitlements do the rich get?
@ Randy, gotcha. No problem.
Oh, Mark, I'm a semi-retired epileptic that just can't work anymore. Even jobs I might be able to do, I get turned down for because I'm too much of an insurance liability.
To my background, I grew up in the '60s, a proud Texan, young Republican guard Reagan fan. Now I'm a liberal to moderate (depending on the issue) hippie, living in Eugene Oregon. I just drop by now and then to keep up....and contribute when and where I can. I'll be the first to admit my opinions aren't exactly "mainstream."
@eap1 Do you teach? How would you know that then? It's one of the hardest yet most rewarding yet underpaid jobs there are except for being a mother. Education is in need of an overhaul, yes, but I don't see anyone offering sensible solutions other than bashing and bad mouthing teachers.
You all make very valid points but one point that must be made is that politicians are politicians. They all can be influenced by groups. You just have to hope that there are checks and balances in place to keep people in check.
To add to the IQ debate. There are many people in the the South who are intelligent. The issue is there are no jobs there so they all leave; therefore, any map you find will not be correct. Just like anyone else, we go where the money and jobs are. I am a Louisiana girl living in Philadelphia who is able to afford to take care of her kids as a single Mom. I couldn't do that on a teacher's salary if I were still teaching in Texas or Louisiana.
To end, this article was really an eye opener for showing me why my home town is the way it is. Even now, when I visit, Mom doesn't want me going downtown. However, I would like to live in the city soon, hopefully within the next two years in Philly. There's more things to do and see here because there's an effort to revitalize it. Plus, as an artist, it just fits my liberal to middle thinking better.
"I don't receive any entitlements. Tell me what I get if you think I do."
eap1 lives in a civilized society. Who pays for civilization? Civilization doesn't happen by itself. If eap1 wants to know what an entitlement-free society looks like he should visit Somalia, Afghanistan, or even Mexico.
So we see the winger brain in action. All the taxes we pay disappear and all the government services should be free. Just like that. Watch eap1 walk into a store and demand his groceries for free. Why not?
The rich get rich with a government system that facilitates the accumulation of wealth and then protects that wealth. How dare a fool demand this service for free!
eap1 is like a psychotic living in an insane asylum at taxpayer expense but thinking he is Napoleon.
Watch eap1 walk into a store and demand his groceries for free. Why not? Because that is communism. No property, no money, no taxes, no government. "The state will wither away" is the goal of communists. Everyone living in a harmonious, communal world. From each according to ability, to each according to need. Based on psychological projection one could deduce a communist society is the goal of government-hating wingers. But it's not. Their goal is the aristocratic world, also without government, where all the property is owned by a few and no one else owns anything, a world where YOU have no property, no money, no taxes, nothing at all.
@ artistring, yes I do in fact teach. You are an artist. Tell me, how do you know then?
@ Covah, the free market pays for civilization, not the government. I go into a store and purchase what I want with my money, that I earned. What does that have to do with entitlements?
You're exactly right, the rich get rich with a government system that facilitates the accumulation of wealth and then protects that wealth. That's the AMERICAN DREAM! What do you want them to do? Keep us all poor? That might be the dumbest thing I've ever heard! You sound bitter because you're broke. If you are, blame yourself, not the rich.
Everyone living in a harmonious, communal world. From each according to ability, to each according to need.
Who are you to determine mine or anyone else's need? Psychological projection? Are you even qualified to make that statement? Are you educated in psychology? You people talk like you know everything. Throwing out big words doesn't prevent your point from being juvenile.
Obviously you're never ran a business or had any economic impact in your life otherwise you wouldn't make such uneducated comments.
Cova says:
Don't think that is a correct statement. In all but a few states, the employers pay for all the unemployment insurance. States like new Jersey charge a local tax, but its not FICA as that is a federal program for social security and medicare. It is interesting to note that the unemployed get more benefits in those states. Not sure what the max benefit is, but in Texas it is $415 a week and I know it is more in New Jersey.
@eap1 - If my links showing that the lower the average IQ of the state was, the more likely to vote Republican convinced you that smart people vote Republican - you can't be reasoned with. Yes, there are lots of intelligent people who vote GOP and lots of dumb people who vote Dem - doesn't mean that they are the majority. As far as the link about registered Dems, that only shows how important turn out is. If every registered voter showed up at the polls on every election, eventually there wouldn't be a two party system (which I would not advocate for, as checks and balances are good - if we can just get the GOP to come back to reality).
@ Bolbis, I never said anything about IQ or intelligence, I said education level. IQ is an inaccurate measurement (it's constantly under fire for bias), education level can be proved.
I don't think anyone believes that one party is "smarter" than the other. But there is a difference in education.
"the free market pays for civilization, not the government."
Oh yeah? Let's see the evidence.
"Free market" is a meaningless slogan. Try to be specific.
"the employers pay for all the unemployment insurance"
Employers do not pay for anything. They take your earned income out of your paycheck before you get the money so it won't be taxed.
Covah, businesses make money. They create wealth. The government doesn't create wealth. They just supply security. The free market is an actual thing. It's not a slogan. Go read an economics book.
You're exactly right, the rich get rich with a government system that facilitates the accumulation of wealth and then protects that wealth. That's the AMERICAN DREAM! What do you want them to do? GIVE IT TO YOU FOR FREE? That might be the dumbest thing I've ever heard!
What does that have to do with entitlements? Duh duh duh...
Duh? Where's the entitlement?
"Businesses make money. They create wealth. The government doesn't create wealth."
Too bad evidence does not support that statement. Compare rich and poor countries. The only difference is the government. Hard-working Mexicans risk their lives to come to this country because of the miserable Mexican government and for no other reason.
Give me the American Dream just because I say so! Give it to me for free!
So there.
What in the heck are you talking about. The reason that we're rich and they're poor is that we have the closest thing to a free market in the world. It's a lack of government intrusion that allows that to happen, not government regulation. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ENTITLEMENTS! We just simply have less government intrusion!
The less government a country has, the more successful they are. Look at the former USSR. They had complete control and it was a catastrophe. North Korea is as close to a pure socialist government the world has ever seen and they're starving! South Korea has the 15th largest economy in the world. They are the same people! The only difference is the South Korean government stays out of their free market.
"The reason that we're rich and they're poor is that we have the closest thing to a free market in the world." Prove that the economy here is freer than in Mexico. If you know Mexico at all you know it is much "freer" there- free to be corrupt, which is what "free market" ultimately means. "We just simply have less government intrusion!" Actually more, if you know what "government intrusion" means. In the real world we call it "law and order".
"The less government a country has, the more successful they are. Look at the former USSR. They had complete control and it was a catastrophe." And now they are better off? You'd better check your data. While you are at it check the communist Chinese.
"The less government a country has, the more successful they are." Let's see some evidence. "North Korea is as close to a pure socialist government the world has ever seen and they're starving!" North Korea is not socialist. "South Korea has the 15th largest economy in the world" because of favored trade status with US. Their economy is anything but free. Read up on the South Korean economy here:
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ks.html
So taking my money is law and order? How about banning abortions, is that law and order? So you're pro-life then right? You want the government to tell us what to do right?
Communist China? So you think slave labor is a good idea then? Most of their country is completely destitute. Yeah, there's a sustainable model, having the largest slave labor force in the world. You sound like you're in favor of communism. How many times does that have to fail for you to realize it doesn't work?
So you're saying that North and South Korea have the same amount of freedom? Nice, you've just displayed how completely ignorant you are about the world. It's nice to know that North Korea is starving because of that perfect communist, awesomely ran economy that they have. And that's with China's support! You would think that with China being as great as they are that North and South Korea would be on the same footing!
Go communism! You make the world run so well!
"So taking my money is law and order?" Yep. Constitution says so.
"Communist China? So you think slave labor..." What do slaves have to do with China? You are making that up. Slaves exist only in a capitalist system.
"You sound like you're in favor of communism. How many times does that have to fail for you to realize it doesn't work?" Compare growth rates in China to US and tell us what is not working. Tell me who is investing in America and who is not. Republicans love to suck up Chinese money while preaching "free market" but refuse to invest in America.
"So you're saying that North and South Korea have the same amount of freedom?" You are lying again. North Korea is not socialist. Europe is socialist. Too bad you do not know what the word means.
You don't think there's slave labor in China? The entire country is a slave to its oppressive government. Wow, I wonder why they're doing so well. Oh, they can do whatever they want to their people, pay them whatever they want. They have no regard for the environment. Why aren't you harping on their human rights violations or raping the Earth over there?
North Korea isn't socialist? Then what is it?
"You don't think there's slave labor in China?" No, there is no slave labor in China.
"The entire country is a slave to its oppressive government. Wow, I wonder why they're doing so well." That is opposite to your assertion that "The less government a country has, the more successful they are". Please try harder to keep your lies straight.
"Oh, they can do whatever they want to their people, pay them whatever they want." You got a problem with that?
"They have no regard for the environment." You have a problem with that?
"Why aren't you harping on their human rights violations or raping the Earth over there?" Sorry dude, not the topic.
"North Korea isn't socialist? Then what is it?" Stalinist.
So you're pro slavery. Yes I have a problem with people that have no concern for human rights.
Wow, Stalin was a socialist. Your lack of education is astounding.
@eap1 - I agree 100% that IQ is not the best barometer of education, but alas that was the only graph I could find in the time that I was willing to dedicate to the search.
As far as this argument about whether N. Korea is socialist or not, you can actually argue either way. The structural set up of the government is communist and socialist in its design (everyone contributes to the whole of the country, no ownership of property, no wealth, etc), but where both N. Korea and the USSR differed from the communist model is in an oligarchical form of government that amasses wealth at the expense of its citizens. This world has never seen any true communist system, as there has always seem to have been a ruthless dictator using the ideals of communism to keep his people subservient. I am not arguing for communism, not that the philosophy should be so condemned in public opinion as it its, I am simply pointing out that most communist governments have been pseudo governments that combine communism with dictatorship.
The idea of everyone contributing towards the good of the society on a whole is not an evil idea, but bad men have championed that idea in the past and twisted it towards their own gains - thus our hatred of the word communism. There is no governmental philosophy that is bad or evil on its own merits - be it socialism, communism, capitalism, feudalism, democracy, a republic, a monoarchy, etc. It is the enacting of the government by the rulers that tends to make certain systems of government more corrupt, or evil if you prefer. There are flaws in every idealistic form of government, thus the reason why most civilized countries are a mix of capitalism-socialism-democracy-republic.
@Eap1 I teach too and have been doing it for 16 years. I teach mostly technology now. Completely read what I wrote and maybe you would see that.
could it be.... teevee?
Woops, replied to wrong thread. Moved.
Hi TRMS,
I by no means support or endorse slavery or segregation, but one thing I'd like to point out.
When you used the "Stars and Bars" reference the other night, that wasn't the "Stars and Bars" you were showing. This is the "Stars an...d Bars" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flags_of_the_Confederate_States_of_America
The flag you showed was one of several Stainless battle flags.
I wish you could realize that it was only the same GOP defending the same top 2% of the wealthiest southerner's right to earn as much money as they could that led to "The War Between The States" (2 states, CSA, USA) as it is the very same GOP conservatives defending the top 2% of the wealthiest people today to get as much as they can now. The only difference between then and now, is there was actually a seperate country formed by the scism.
I guess our history then was just so successfully rewritten that noone of this generation can see that anymore.
Thanks for your time, your work and your show. I'm a big fan.
I do wish people were more educated about the whole flag issue. The real Stars & Bars is the sign of a true bigot (flag is made up of only red field and X of stars). I have even confronted some in this area about it. So many of them can on respond with nuh-unh due to their own historical ignorance. Terribly sad for all involved.
"I do wish people were more educated about the whole flag issue." ...I am. The Confederate National Flag is patterned after the United States flag..."Stars and Stripes". (blue field, top left with stars in it.) I even provided a link for you.
Just so you know, I agree with you that most that proudly display the Battle Flag as some form of "protest" or rebellion, probably do lack knowledge of history and are probably bigoted. ...but again, only in general terms. There are no absolutes in this world.
Oh, one final point... The only reason there was ever a Battle Flag in the first place is because the "Stars and Bars" and "Stars and Stripes" were almost indistinguishable when furled, on the battlefield.
I think you protest too much. What the person above you was saying is that the ignoramuses of today use the symbol from the upper left of the Stainless flag exclusively on a full-sized flag. The national flag of the Confederacy, after the stars and bars version was abandoned, was the Stainless Flag with the symbol in the upper left corner of what ignorant people call the stars and bars and the rest in white. Later that was changed to adding a red bar on the far right side of the flag for the Bloodstained Flag. But these were full sized flags.
The Army of Northern Virginia flew varying sized, significantly smaller-sized, no white version of the Stainless Flag, depending on whether it was a artillery, infantry or calvary units. This flag used only the symbol from the upper left. A bannerman on a horse at gallop would have been pulled out of the saddle by a full sized flag. Practicality dictated a shortened version. Likewise for a bannerman in the infantry. A full sized flag would have worn him out before the charge really got started. The ignoramuses of my home state who proudly run around with a full sized Army of Northern Virginia flag and call it the Confederate flag are indeed stupid and ignorant of the history that they claim that they know so much about.
You descriptions of the flags was accurate and I agree with most of it. However, your response to DforDemocracy seems to be based on a misunderstanding of his posting. DforDemocracy also misunderstands the entire flag issue, although he has a better grasp than most. You have a very good grasp of the situation. The Wikipedia statements about the modern "Confederate Flag" smacks of someone who is trying to justify the use of a banner for racist reasons but calling them historical. It is ignorance anyway you look at it. Furthermore, the flags that were carried onto a battlefield were not furled as the infantry would need to see the unfurled flags to be able to rally to the flag as orderly ranks fell apart in the "fog of war."
lol...Scarlet, we seem to be debating on the same side. When I read this comment of his, I had to read it 3 times, just to be certain I was reading it correctly,
" The real Stars & Bars is the sign of a true bigot (flag is made up of only red field and X of stars)."
The Stars and Bars is not "made up of only a red field and X of stars".
That aside, I was trying to take this opportunity to point out to TRMS that they had referred to "The Blood Stained Banner" as being the "Stars and Bars" on her show the other night. That was the correction I was trying to get across.
If I'm still reading DforDem's post wrong, I'm sorry. I guess we're just interpreting it differently.
To my original post and the reason for it, it was a copy of my comment on the Facebook post I made at the same time, written (hurridly) there, then copied and pasted here.
Sorry for any misunderstandings, but I think we're coming from the same place.
Oh, oh, my use of "furled" was intended as the flag's state when there's no wind present....not necessarily bound or in a case.
To SanityClause, of course there are Bigots everywhere.... there does that make you feel better ............it doesn't make it right...
Some more AMAZING images from Farm Security Administration photog Marion Post Wolcott (June 7, 1910 - November 24, 1990):
http://thesillyboodilly.blogspot.com/2008/10/standing-at-crossroads-photography-of.html
Unrelated to the post, but I clicked a video and was disheartened to find the advert was Exxon bragging about how good for us fracking is. Shame on you msnbc.
lol...not that it'll be noticed here, but what the heck. I agree, wholeheartedly.
I moved from Connecticut to Lexington, KY to work for a department store in 1972. I was told that the store had been allowing black people in as customers for just two years.
seems like what was written was blaming racism for the downtowns across America drying up. Well, that just doesn't seem to me to hold much water. The city I've lived in most of my adult life does not have a very large minority population, and I don't recall ever hearing of any racial problems and I've lived here since 1974. The population here is about 22,000, and our downtown area is just as dried up as all the other downtown areas across America.
I have to admit it, yes, my earlier post was in response to the story the other night. To this evening's story, I'd agree with the point that the single leading cause of this change in our heritage and culture is "hands' down" our "love" of the automobile and the status and individual badge of honor that it has come to represent.
I can see the connection people are making with integration and the disintegration of public urban life... But as a Northerner living in the city that Frederick Douglas made his home (Rochester), a city that was a major hot spot for abolitionists and the Underground Railroad, I have to say we've experienced the same thing you describe and we never had segregation! I believe it has more to do with the trend of the middle and upper classes to move out into the suburbs in the 1950s and afterward.
Yes, the demographics ended up with whites more heavily in suburbs and blacks more in the city. But this seems to have had more to with economic status than a racist desire to separate. Indeed, where I grew up in the suburbs, black students were the minority. But they seemed to come from families with the same values and work ethic that the average white families held. They seemed to have the same desire to escape the crime, drugs, gangs, etc, that proliferated in the inner city and give their children a better life just as white families did.
Which of course brings up the problem of social groups born into poverty and their limited opportunities which ups the chances of succumbing to crime. The local community college that I've attended myself has a downtown campus dedicated at reaching out to city youth and provide them with higher education. In most cases they get a free ride through financial aid, and remedial classes are provided to catch up those who's high school education was lacking. The suburban campus of this college is on the city public bus route and the college encourages city students to attend both campuses. Even my former suburban high school has a program where some city kids are bussed into the suburbs for school. My hope is that programs like these help people break away from poverty and crime, and improve the skewed ratios between suburban and urban demographics.
However, the honest truth is there is a downside to such initiatives. My suburban high school had increased violence, drug infiltration, and gang activity by the time my younger brother got there eight years after me (after the urban busing program started). Likewise, the suburban community college campus also saw an increase in fights, theft, etc.
I attended the college approx 10 years ago, and returned recently. The difference in environment is almost night and day. It was previously a calm, pleasant environment, where I felt safe and never even thought of locking my car. Now the halls are loud and sometimes threatening. I even witnessed a stabbing there about two years ago. My friend had her car broken into. And classes are often interrupted and professors disrespected by students who lack discipline, speak out of turn, and accuse professors of racism for low grades. It's impossible to study in the library because of students being loud, playing rap music, even making out on the furniture. And unfortunately, 90% of the time this behavior is demonstrated by one demographic who shall remain unnamed, while the other demographic quietly attempts to block it out and focus on school work.
Perceptive observation...Well said!
We may also note that America's longest lasting "wars"(Drugs and Poverty) have had a direct and lasting negative effect not only upon the middle/middle and lower economic classes but seems particularly skewed toward one of those "demographics"!
Also...Going to prison seems to be becoming a "national pastime"...Maybe not as much fun as a baseball game but the food is probably better and cheaper! Three hots and a cot and you're off the street for awhile...Where's the downside here?
We have to address these issues...and yet we have our two major political parties more inclined to bickering and childish nattering...With no adult in sight!
Oh brother. Say what you will, but my guess is that there was "violence and drug infiltration" in your suburban school long before your "unnamed" demographic appeared in larger numbers. It's just that nobody automatically associated such incidents as endemic of YOUR demographic. Nope. It's only when Others were spotlighted for engaging in the exact same behavior that such behavior became recognized as a "problem" associated with a certain demographic.
As for your college experience, I hate to say it, but it just sounds like a crappy school. For my research, I've visited several campuses (including HBCUs) and never once saw the type of behavior you're describing in a college library. Nor have I ever visited any institution in which 100% of the kids belonging to the, let's say, dominant group spent all their time "focusing" on school work.
As for the other comment about how "going to prison seems to be becoming a national pastime," not one person in jail put themselves in there. So exactly whose pastime are we talking about?
In fact every one of them did!Thier behavior on the "streets" provoked law enforcement and the courts to remove them from the "streets"! Maybe not Federal Prison...but...Almost every other city,county and state prison will own up to "seeing the regulars" every year when the weather starts to get colder!
As a healthcare provider with fifteen yrs. experience in state and county correctional facilities I have seen far too many incidence of "Wintering Over"and doing a couple on the "lowdown"so the street heat cools! Prison a good place to establish and polish your "Creds"or get some "college",Free!
If you just can't behave or like to fight or even mention"suicide"you can get your own private room...Even in the Supermax facilities this means meals delivered to your door,mail delivered to your door and maybe Cable for your TV! That "suicide" trip will get you the BEST drugs,too!
Its all just Time...And considering that we LEAD the freakin WORLD in incarcerations,especialy among the previously noted "demographic", it seems only logical we should see it showing up on TV...Oh wait...Don't tell me ESPN blew the contract!!
While it may not be a ratified "Sport",it has become a way of life for many, a right of passage for some and a necessary addition to any political resume in some places(Hack/cough Loosy-effin-ann cough!)!
If Medi-care and Medicade get chopped we can likely figure on the head count in the aforementioned "demographics"to go right through the roof!
Using code and unnecessary "quotation marks" doesn't really cover up the racism. FYI.
Nor does accusing someone of "Racism" necessarily make it so! FYI.
As to "codes"...I thought the terms I used were relatively simple and easy to comprehend...None of my four mixed race children found them offensive(well...I did get some criticism over that "effin" thing)!
I suppose if we look hard and long enough it would be possible to see racism in every spoken thought and every printed word..but who's got that time or ambition?
I've said before and will say again...I think bigotry is the testicles of the mind,closely guarded and tightly held but in the end just nuts!
I'm not sure if,years ago, I may have read something like that...Eric Hoffer or maybe Ambrose Bierce...Can't find it in Camp's!
GrrrlRomeo...Mildly sorry if you found my use of terms racist...I poke fun at everybody and most everything and probably will continue!Religionists,politicians and the thin skinned are my favorite targets as they,in my opinion, deserve every bit of crap thrown at them!
Reminds me of when I worked at the p-farm (prison farm) some years ago....a guy was scheduled to be released on Thanksgiving day. I will never forget him yelling, screaming and fighting as they loaded him into the van to be dropped off somehwere...."You are not going to cheat me out of my Thanksgiving Dinner!!".
I really need to look at/edit my posts before I submit them, that's down-right embarrassing.
Amen, brother. Me, too.
Finally, an intelligent discussion about race relations. I grew up in a suburban town near a major eastern city. There was not a single African American in our school system. There were many Jewish, eastern European, Italian, and Irish families. There were ethnic clubs everywhere. There was one black church immediately next door to my grandmother's house. The members commuted in from the city to attend on Sundays only. Racism was rampant, but there was no violence, and little crime. We all thought black folks just didn't want to live there because there was so little to do. That downtown (really just one main street and one old theater) is practically deserted now. When I visit, I still see very few black faces. Folks drive and sit in traffic to go to the malls, where I see quite a few black faces. Downtowns are decaying, not because of white flight, but because of parking, convenience, and the automobile. What's interesting these days is the number of empty storefronts in the malls now, and the big box stores anchoring their own shopping centers. And folks, it's all made in China.
I don't want to bust anyone's "I'm not a racist and I can prove it. As Donald Trump" bubble, but if the reason was the MLK assassination and the riots that followed (My God, that one surely smacks of KKK racism at its finest!) or the change of lifestyle to the suburbs, sorry, but I lived it and it is about race. If it wasn't, why, at the same time the public transportation was ceded to African Americans by white America and the downtowns were abandoned because they were "dangerous" and mom wouldn't let you go down there, why was that. Because there were so many African Americans, that's why. You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig.
As for the theaters moving to the malls as the reason for the shutdowns, Belzoni, Mississippi doesn't have a mall. The nearest one is 40 Miles away in Greenwood, Mississippi. And at the same time that the theaters were integrated and abandoned by white America, the public pools were shut down because the white dominated governing bodies didn't want tax Dollars going to support what had become an African American recreational facility. Post-racial America. Read those responses again and tell me that with a straight and informed face.
Scarlet, I'm only posting this as an anecdote. Your choice of words reminded me of an article I read in the Huffington Post a week or 2 ago. The Ku Klux Klan, LLC officially decreed that it's members reject any association or affiliation with Donald Trump, and for the same reasons, The Tea Party.
Now for Trump to prompt that response from Klan, that is really saying something.
When I was stationed in the military in South Carolina and Alabama in 1969 & 1970 respectfully, I had befriended an African-American who was from the New York, I'm white. We seldom went into town, but on one occasion in Columbia, S.C. we stopped at a small diner for lunch. As we entered we got very angry looks from the other patrons and the waitress completely ignored us and would not service us. After about 15 minutes of calling to her, it was obvious that we were would not be served, so we left and went back to the base.
In Dothan Alabama it was even worse. We went to a retail store and I was received with "Get out of here, you N...r lover. We don't want your kind in here." It was very hostile. Again we left and returned back to base. It was even hard to get a cab, if we were standing together.
Coming from the West, Utah, I had very little exposure to African-Americans, as Utah at that time had so few African-Americans that they were a novelty when we saw them, usually as conductors at the train station, when we still had passenger trains or bus boys at a nice restaurant. As a child I would stare at them in wonderment why they had dark skin. The military gave me an opportunity to see that they are no different then me, we bleed and die the same.
I of course knew about the civil rights fight and the death of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr, but it was far away and not in may face. But when I was confronted with the hate and anger when I was in the South, it was a complete shock. At that moment I came to understand the civil rights movement and how important it was, and still is. I kept hearing from the locals in the South that the war was an aggression by the north on their sovereign nation, and soon the south would rise again. I would ask if that meant bringing back slavery, and they would smile in a kind of affirmative way.
Sorry, just to clarify, I hit "Like" before I got to the last paragraph. I meant "Thanks for sharing". :D
Laura prefaced my quoted comment with, "or maybe it's just the march of progress"
I've been thinking about that a good bit. Whether progress is marching in the right direction? The word progress can mean different things, but it's use is generally connotative of advancement, improvement, increase. The 20th century saw improvement in many ways. Race and gender equality improved, not perfectly, but it's better. The U.S. is certainly richer. Technology has taken giant leaps forward and continues apace.
Though the loss of "community" doesn't particular trouble me, as an individual, it's loss is a detriment to a civil society. And I wonder what other costs are hidden by all this "progress" that we are just beginning to realize now? One things that trouble me, particularly, is the growing lack of ethical behavior by both government and business. There has certainly been environmental impacts from all this "progress," though to what severity has yet to be born out.
Progress can also be defined as "movement toward a goal." Is the inevitable march of progress moving us, as a society, toward a better place, an improvement or advancement of all of us? I'm not sure.
The grentrification of the cities, while it may appear to be race based is not, per se. This movement is class based and poor whites in America are as much hated as blacks, Latinos, Hispanics or any other minority. Get over yourselves "n_____s."
Right you are,Grams, those Necrophiles have been getting the cold end of the deal for waaaay too long!
I've often wondered which came first... Economic stratification,ethnocentricity, religious seperatism or porn...Or might they all be fleas on the same dog of human insecurity?
There is hope...Repubs are talking about digging up ol Ronnie Rayguns...Offers the advantages of not being able to tell on 'em and probably smells better than most of 'em!