• 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!

Pippi Longstocking and 6 other supposedly racist children's characters

Hatuey said:
This is a pretty good indication that you will be anything but.



Yeah, the part of blacks being subservient to whites or the part about Africans not having their own culture (see "patrie"), or the part about African savages wanting to kill whites. Yeah, those aren't offensive. Are we talking about them not being offensive to apologists for colonialism or not being offensive to blacks?
Click to expand...

You're not African...whatta you care?
 
Hatuey said:
Yeah, the part of blacks being subservient to whites
Click to expand...

The litter could be something afforded to any honored guest. Like I said, it depends upon context.

or the part about Africans not having their own culture (see "patrie")
Click to expand...

All I see is a guy telling the natives about his country in a classroom. More context is needed than that.

Besides, it's not uncommon for missionaries and non-profit organizations to go to third world countries with the intention of "educating" the native population even today. Is that racist?

or the part about African savages wanting to kill whites.
Click to expand...

Sometimes they did. :shrug:

Yeah, those aren't offensive. Are we talking about them not being offensive to apologists for colonialism or not being offensive to blacks?
Click to expand...

Does it matter? The story is a product of its time. If you don't like it, you don't have to read it.

As I said, I agree that it's rather tasteless, and should probably be taken off of shelves for that reason. However, I don't see any particular reason for ignoble outrage over the issue.

Fiddytree said:
What about the meaning surrounding colonialist-politics: whites above colored, whites educate and civilize savage cultures by obliterating the "native" civilization's heritage, and so forth?
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but none of that is really conveyed by what Hatuey posted.

Whether the book itself goes considerably deeper than that, I couldn't tell you. I was simply evaluating what had been presented.

The art style and depiction of the natives is generally tasteless, but the message it's self is less obviously grating.

Frankly, what does it matter is you disagree with the message anyway? There are all kinds of books out there with bad messages. I'm not about to start burning literature over it.
 
Kobie said:
"Government run." Yes, Obama is issuing edicts from the White House about library books.

Local libraries are at about as podunk a level of government as you can get.
Click to expand...

Boy! You people sure are sensitive about boy!...lol!
 
Gathomas88 said:
Perhaps, but none of that is really conveyed by what Hatuey posted.

Whether the book itself goes considerably deeper than that, I couldn't tell you. I simply evaluating what had been presented.

The art style and depiction of the natives is generally tasteless, but the message it's self is less obviously grating.

Frankly, what does it matter is you disagree with the message anyway? There are all kinds of books out there with bad messages. I'm not about to start burning literature over it.
Click to expand...

All of that was pretty evident in the images and text provided by Hatuey. Image 1: Savagery. Image 2: Educating natives about their home country of Belgium. Power granted to the white educator, instructing black students, not about their culture, but of the hegemonic power. Image 3: White man experiencing the privilege of his culture over that of the colonized peoples.
 
Hatuey said:
They turn into Nazis? Or is it Maoists now? I forget which fallacy you subscribe to on a regular basis.
Click to expand...

Nazis...Communists...there ain't a dime's worth of difference between them.
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
To be fair, the ALA has always been really fundamental about first amendment issues. They will make most hardcore ACLUers look like weekend warriors
Click to expand...

The ALA isn't a government organization though...
 
apdst said:
Nazis...Communists...there ain't a dime's worth of difference between them.
Click to expand...

You know who also spoke in generalities? The Nazis.
 
Mason66 said:
Did it permanently damage you to see the scenes they had over the kitchen area and around the restaurant of the Sambo character?

We ate there too, although we were much farther south, and I can honestly say it did no damage to me.
Click to expand...

Precisely my point. I went home to my grandpa's house and played with the neighbor kids, chances were good they were eating there too. The neighborhood he lived in was predominently black. As I recall other races too. Skin color just wasn't a thing, and Sambos had the best pancakes, ever.
 
Hatuey said:
The ALA isn't a government organization though...
Click to expand...

I was just commenting on the fact that the ALA is pretty well against banning books for any reason. I didn't mean to imply they were a govt body
 
apdst said:
Boy! You people sure are sensitive about boy!...lol!
Click to expand...

You're the one who posted GOVERNMENT RUN in ALL CAPS as if it ****ING MATTERED.
 
Gathomas88 said:
The litter could be something afforded to any honored guest. Like I said, it depends upon context.
Click to expand...

Honored guest or just any European like Tin-Tin was. ;)

All I see is a guy telling the natives about his country in a classroom.
Click to expand...

Do you speak French? Votre patrie is not "his" nation. It's their nation.

More context is needed than that.
Click to expand...

Sérieusement, je veux que tu commences par apprendre un peux de Français. Le contexte que tu me demandes es clairement visible a une personne qu'est vraiment familiarisée avec la culture coloniale des pais comme la France et la Belgique.

Besides, it's not uncommon for missionaries and non-profit organizations to go to third world countries with the intention of "educating" the native population even today. Is that racist?
Click to expand...

Actually, it is. It assumes that people 1) need your educating 2) need your salvation 3) need your help. I can't believe I'm explaining why the colonialism depicted in Tin-Tin is incredibly racist.



Sometimes they did. :shrug:

Does it matter? The story is a product of its time. If you don't like it, you don't have to read it.

As I said, I agree that it's rather tasteless, and should probably be taken off of shelves for that reason. However, I don't see any particular reason for ignoble outrage over the issue.
Click to expand...

Ah, so you've reverted to "don't read it". Well, it's why don't we instead propose it be removed from schools and if a kid wants to read it, they can go find it? ;)
 
Kobie said:
To be fair, everybody generalizes.
Click to expand...

It's settled. We're all Nazis. This is almost as fun as when Bronson would use socialism.
 
I still think you might be reading too much into it. Even if the things you mentioned are present, they are going to go way over the head of any child reading the book.

Fiddytree said:
Image 1: Savagery.
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but so what? Apart from the fact that he's black and speaks slightly broken English, how is he different from any other cartoon villain?

I agree that the manner of his portrayal is tasteless, but the fact that he is portrayed as being hostile at all isn't "racist" in and of itself.

Image 2: Educating natives about their home country of Belgium.
Click to expand...

I'll admit that I did miss the "their" part of the equation. However, even then, the simple act of educating someone on a certain way of life isn't "racist" in and of itself. If he were to start doing comparisons, and going out of his way to present the natives' way of life as being buffoonish and idiotic in comparison to his own, that would be where I drew the line in this regard.

He might very well do this later in the comic. It simply wasn't apparent in the snippet Hat posted.

Power granted to the white educator, instructing black students, not about their culture, but of the hegemonic power.
Click to expand...

Well, yes, but that is what pretty much always happens when one culture conquers another. I don't find the simple allusion to it to be particularly offensive.

It depends upon the presentation.

Image 3: White man experiencing the privilege of his culture over that of the colonized peoples.
Click to expand...

Like I said, that could an honor bestowed on any high status visitor. It depends upon the context.
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
lol @ that guy
Click to expand...

The difference is I have no liquor this time around. Kobie and I got e-drunk because of a 10 post exchange with him. He must have used "socialist scum" around 15 times per post.
 
Gathomas88 said:
I still think you might be reading too much into it. Even if the things you mentioned are present, they are going to go way over the head of any child reading the book.

Perhaps, but so what? Apart from the fact that he's black and speaks slightly broken English, how is he different from any other cartoon villain?

I agree that the manner of his portrayal is tasteless, but the fact that he is portrayed as being hostile at all isn't "racist" in and of itself.

I'll admit that I did miss the "their" part of the equation. However, even then, the simple act of educating someone on a certain way of life isn't "racist" in and of itself. If he were to start doing comparisons, and going out of his way to present the natives' way of life as being buffoonish and idiotic in comparison to his own, that would be where I drew the line in this regard.

He might very well do this later in the comic. It simply wasn't apparent in the snippet Hat posted.

Well, yes, but that is what pretty much always happens when one culture conquers another. I don't find the simple allusion to it to be particularly offensive.

It depends upon the presentation.

Like I said, that could an honor bestowed on any high status visitor. It depends upon the context.
Click to expand...

Call it a day Fiddy. This guy is an apologist. He hides behind "in their context" and then ignores the colonial context not to mention completely dismisses barbaric history of the Belgian Congo (see Leopold) - which is a large part of the story's extensive context. Only on DP folks.
 
Hatuey said:
The difference is I have no liquor this time around. Kobie and I got e-drunk because of a 10 post exchange with him. He must have used "socialist scum" around 15 times per post.
Click to expand...

I never said that.
 
Hatuey said:
Honored guest or just any European like Tin-Tin was. ;)
Click to expand...

It's not like it's an inaccurate portrayal. :shrug:

Do you speak French? Votre patrie is not "his" nation. It's their nation.
Click to expand...

I'll admit that I did miss that. However, it should be noted that they were, technically, Belgian subjects at this point.

As such, the description isn't inaccurate.

Actually, it is. It assumes that people 1) need your educating 2) need your salvation 3) need your help.
Click to expand...

Have you been to any of the countries these organizations visit lately? There's nothing wrong with charity work.

If their culture is really that great, it will resist assimilation anyway.

I can't believe I'm explaining why the colonialism depicted in Tin-Tin is incredibly racist.
Click to expand...

It may or may not be. All I'm saying is that I really don't see "colonialism" as being particularly offensive in and of itself.

It was a fact of history whether you like it or not, and so were the attitudes represented in that book. Pretending like this wasn't the case when it plainly was isn't going to accomplish anything.

That kind of context is going to fly completely over most kids' heads anyway.

Ah, so you've reverted to "don't read it". Well, it's why don't we instead propose it be removed from schools and if a kid wants to read it, they can go find it? ;)
Click to expand...

In this particular case, that is probably justified. While I doubt that many Libraries have copies of "Tin Tin in the Congo" just lying around, it is tasteless enough to merit being taken off shelves.

I simply don't really understand all the outrage over it. Are you guys really surprised that early twentieth century colonialists tended to be less than "politically correct" in their worldview? :lol:
 
Gathomas88 said:
I still think you might be reading too much into it. Even if the things you mentioned are present, they are going to go way over the head of any child reading the book.
Click to expand...

It may or may not go ahead of the child's head. It's not reading all that much into it. We can find all sorts of goodies in popular culture if you look. Again, it's not really shocking, and it's why I sometimes encourage it with a large chunk of films portraying the 1950s (they tend to use a New Left or Neomarxist framework). Conservatives aren't afraid of doing it, at least sometimes.

Image 1: The discussion seems to center on his status as a white man, against that of his people, for discontent.

Image 2: We can pull it back a bit. I wasn't simply stating racist, I was going after the notion that this wouldn't be offensive. So, on the first step, it certainly can be offensive if you are looking at it from the perspective of the colonized. Romanticization of Americanization projects in Indian Boarding Schools in the United States would likewise cause controversy, and not without merit. Next, to attach racial components to it, you have to recall that the Belgians, along with every great European power, did impart racial hierarchies to justify their empires. The choice to educate students about the great empire of Belgium is not just a choice of empire and the nation, it is a choice of cultural and racial superiority taken as a rather matter-of-fact view for the time period and place at which the story was written.

More on Image 2: Again, think about the subject from a post-colonialist perspective. If one were to strive to overcome one's national "sins" or perhaps address portrayals of other cultures in your popular culture, then this would be cause for offense. It's why we Americans criticize what the Japanese do in their classrooms regarding acknowledging or discussing the sins of their own empire (I'm especially thinking about the Chinese here), and do the same in many other countries.

Image 3: What about Tin-Tin gives him status? Is it his wealth? Is it his nationality?
 
apdst said:
Libraries are run by...um...government.
Click to expand...

Of course they are -- government on a small-time local scale. Again, in the context of this discussion, why does it matter.
 
Gathomas88 said:
It's not like it's an inaccurate portrayal. :shrug:
Click to expand...

He's an out work teenage who goes around solving crimes all over the world. You tell me how accurate his portrayal is.

I'll admit that I did miss that. However, it be noted that they were, technically, Belgian subjects at this point. As such, the description isn't inaccurate.
Click to expand...

As most in the B.C. were never even considered Belgian citizens, held any rights equivalent to belgians or even so much as spoke French or shared Belgian culture calling Belgium "their nation" is absolutely inaccurate. Seriously, you're way out of your league here.

You been to any of the countries these organizations visit lately? There's nothing wrong with charity work.
Click to expand...

I'll take simplistic Eurocentric perspective of complex issues for 600 Alex.

If their culture is really that great, it will resist assimilation anyway.
Click to expand...

It did. It has. Today, the only sense you'd have that the DRC was once owned by the Belgians is the modern day carnage handed down by Leopold.

It may or may not be. All I'm saying is that I really don't see "colonialism" as being particularly offensive in and of itself.
Click to expand...

Unless of course the depiction of colonialism is one meant to whitewash the atrocities committed. You're being purposely obtuse.

It was a fact of history whether you like it or not, and so were the attitudes represented in that book. Pretending like this wasn't the case isn't going to accomplish anything. That kind of context is going to fly completely over most kids heads anyway. In this particular case, that is probably justified. While I doubt that many Libraries have copies of this particular book just lying around, it is tasteless enough to merit being taken off shelves. I simply don't really understand all the outrage over it. Are you guys really surprised that early twentieth century colonialists tended to less than "politically correct" in their worldview? :lol:
Click to expand...

Revisionism, apologism, historical ignorance. That's what the rest of your post boils down to.
 
apdst said:
I never said that.
Click to expand...

Who said you did? We're laughing at your use of any of these words: nazi, socialism, hitler, goebbels, propaganda etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom