• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Newest Michigan museum showcases racist artifacts [W:103]

Luna Tick

Luna Tick

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 31, 2010
Messages
2,148
Reaction score
867
Location
Nebraska
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I don't know if I can stand to go to this museum. If I'm ever in Michigan, I'll decide.

Newest Michigan museum showcases racist artifacts

(04-19) 05:05 PDT Big Rapids, Mich. (AP) --
The objects displayed in Michigan's newest museum range from the ordinary, such as simple ashtrays and fishing lures, to the grotesque — a full-size replica of a lynching tree. But all are united by a common theme: They are steeped in racism so intense that it makes visitors cringe.
That's the idea behind the Jim Crow Museum of Racist Memorabilia, which says it has amassed the nation's largest public collection of artifacts spanning the segregation era, from Reconstruction until the civil rights movement, and beyond.
The museum in a gleaming new exhibit hall at Ferris State University "is all about teaching, not a shrine to racism," said David Pilgrim, the founder and curator who started building the collection as a teenager.
Pilgrim, who is black, makes no apologies for the provocative exhibits. The goal of the $1.3 million gallery, he explained, is "to get people to think deeply."
Click to expand...

Entire article here:
Newest Michigan museum showcases racist artifacts
 
I have visited the sites of former concentration camps in Germany. I have visited Tuol Sleng and some of the Killing Fields in Cambodia. I have placed my hand on the tree against which the Khmer Rouge would smash the babies so as not to waste ammunition.

There is nothing fun or even redemptive about visiting such places. But I still think it is important to do so if you can muster the will. We must never forget what we, as humans, are capable of.

If I ever find myself near Ferris State University I will pay a visit to the museum.
 
We need more museums like this as a constant reminder. Nobody in their right mind would ever tell Jewish people to "get over" the Holocaust.
 
My biggest disappointment is that the artifacts aren't all from the 1950s and earlier. There are some recent additions, including bigoted things against Barack Obama.
 
nothing wrong with educating people about racism.

the more we forget...the likelier we are to repeat.
 
Thunder said:
nothing wrong with educating people about racism.

the more we forget...the likelier we are to repeat.
Click to expand...


Yep, I wonder if they included that Jim Crow laws were devised, and implemented by liberals.


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Yep, I wonder if they included that Jim Crow laws were devised, and implemented by liberals.


j-mac
Click to expand...

I simply cannot tell you how ****ing disappointed I am that you chose to politicize this thread. The words simply are not there.

nice going.
 
j-mac said:
Yep, I wonder if they included that Jim Crow laws were devised, and implemented by liberals.


j-mac
Click to expand...

Southern democrats, not liberals.

Nice revisionist history though.
 
Your Star said:
Southern democrats, not liberals.

Nice revisionist history though.
Click to expand...

I know what you have been taught no doubt from progressive profs. that are ashamed of the sorted past of liberal democrats in our society, but it would serve you to be honest about liberal racism.

During the early part of the 20th century, the Presidents and the Congress worked together to decrease the number of federal appointments to blacks and to ensure that federal officials in the south were sympathetic to the cause of white supremacy. During the early years of the Wilson administration (1913-1917), the Democratic Representatives submitted more racist legislation than had been introduced to any previous Congress. Disfranchised and demoralized, few blacks voted during these years, leading to an even greater indifference of both parties to the black vote. The Republicans did not need black votes to control Congress, and Democrats did not care about a black constituency.

When legislation was introduced to protect blacks, Democrats convinced Republicans to join them in their disregard for civil rights and suffrage for blacks.

The Rise and Fall of Jim Crow. A National Struggle . The Congress | PBS
Click to expand...

j-mac
 
Thunder said:
I simply cannot tell you how ****ing disappointed I am that you chose to politicize this thread. The words simply are not there.

nice going.
Click to expand...


Aw really? If the words aren't there does that mean that you are done posting?


j-mac
 
Your Star said:
Southern democrats, not liberals.

Nice revisionist history though.
Click to expand...

yes, Southern racist Democrats, aka Dixiecrats...who refused to allow blacks join them and bolted to the Republican Party after the Voting Rights and Civil Rights Acts,

and the GOP welcomed them with open arms. This was known as the Southern Strategy...and it lost the South for the Democrats for a generation....or 4.

but it was worth it...if that's what was needed to get rid of all those racists.
 
Last edited:
I think it's good that these kind of museums exist. If any of you guys are ever in DC, I highly recommend going through the Holocaust Museum. Like this museum, it's not exactly "fun," but it's something that is definitely worth seeing in order to understand the darkest acts of humanity.

I can't imagine when I would ever go to Big Rapids, Michigan...but if I did I would definitely visit their new museum.
 
j-mac said:
I know what you have been taught no doubt from progressive profs. that are ashamed of the sorted past of liberal democrats in our society, but it would serve you to be honest about liberal racism.



j-mac
Click to expand...

Do facts not matter to you? Just because it says democrats doesn't mean they are liberal.
 
Your Star said:
Do facts not matter to you? Just because it says democrats doesn't mean they are liberal.
Click to expand...

crazy huh, that 60 years ago the biggest racists were Democrats.

if Lincoln were alive today, he surely would have been a Liberal-Progressive Democrat.
 
Thunder said:
crazy huh, that 60 years ago the biggest racists were Democrats.

if Lincoln were alive today, he surely would have been a Liberal-Progressive Democrat.
Click to expand...
That's quite an assumption.
 
Thunder said:
crazy huh, that 60 years ago the biggest racists were Democrats.

if Lincoln were alive today, he surely would have been a Liberal-Progressive Democrat.
Click to expand...

Southern democrats, and southern republicans as well, though a southern republican is like a gay republican today ;) People in the south hated the party of Lincoln, and that is why the democrats ruled the south, even though it is a very conservative place. Only until the past 10-15 years have the republicans taken over, hell Georgia didn't have a republican governor for a 100 plus years until 2000.

So while yes they had a D in front of their name they were hardly liberal, and southern democrats were as different from northern democrats as republicans and democrats are different today.
 
Your Star said:
Southern democrats, and southern republicans as well, though a southern republican is like a gay republican today ;) People in the south hated the party of Lincoln, and that is why the democrats ruled the south, even though it is a very conservative place. Only until the past 10-15 years have the republicans taken over, hell Georgia didn't have a republican governor for a 100 plus years until 2000.

So while yes they had a D in front of their name they were hardly liberal, and southern democrats were as different from northern democrats as republicans and democrats are different today.
Click to expand...

again, I am massively impressed by your knowledge and level of thought. Kudos, again. :)
 
Your Star said:
Do facts not matter to you? Just because it says democrats doesn't mean they are liberal.
Click to expand...

It's a pretty good bet... the conservative Democrat is akin to seeing a Vancouver Island Marmot; you hear about them in books but no one ever sees one.
 
Ockham said:
It's a pretty good bet... the conservative Democrat is akin to seeing a Vancouver Island Marmot; you hear about them in books but no one ever sees one.
Click to expand...

back in the 60s....MANY Democrats were Conservatuve and racist to the core.

but we got rid of them...and sent them to the GOP.
 
Ockham said:
It's a pretty good bet... the conservative Democrat is akin to seeing a Vancouver Island Marmot; you hear about them in books but no one ever sees one.
Click to expand...

We aren't talking about today, we are talking about 50-150 years ago. You can't equate political parties from today to political parties from back then, you just can't. Unless you just want to score a cheap political point, and don't care about being a partisan hack.
 
Your Star said:
We aren't talking about today, we are talking about 50-150 years ago. You can't equate political parties from today to political parties from back then, you just can't. Unless you just want to score a cheap political point, and don't care about being a partisan hack.
Click to expand...

50 years ago... some (at least more than today), 150 years ago the definition of "liberal" wouldn't make sense in that historical context, so it's an apples and persimmons comparison.
 
Ockham said:
50 years ago... some (at least more than today), 150 years ago the definition of "liberal" wouldn't make sense in that historical context, so it's an apples and persimmons comparison.
Click to expand...

When talking about democrats 50 years ago, you must note the differences between northern and southern democrats. Southern democrats were racists, and were only democrats because no one would join the party of Lincoln.
 
Last edited:
Your Star said:
When talking about democrats 50 years ago, you must not the differences between northern and southern democrats. Southern democrats were racists, and were only democrats because no one would join the party of Lincoln.
Click to expand...

until Johnson signed the Civil Rights and Votings Rights Act. And Kennedy took on George Wallace.

that pushed the racists over the edge..and sent them fleeing to the open & loving arms..of the Grand Ol' Party.

:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom