• 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!

Kate Smith’s ‘Racist Songs’: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know

TU Curmudgeon said:
From Heavy

Kate Smith’s ‘Racist Songs’: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know
​

Kate Smith, a popular Depression-era American singer, is most famous for her version of “God Bless America.” The song is played often at sporting events, including national and professional leagues and teams.

Not anymore. At least for the Philadelphia Flyers and the New York Yankees.

In reports and statements, both teams have said that having recently learned about Smith’s history of racist songs, she’s been dumped.

Smith, who died in 1986, was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 1982 by then-Pres. Ronald Reagan.

Here’s what you need to know:

COMMENT:-

Although it's going just a bit too far to say that if a trio composed of Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin, and Pol Pot were to sing "God Bless America" with the same quality of sincerity as Ms. Smith sang it then I'd play it regardless, it isn't completely outside the realm of possibility that I would either.

Does what someone did 90+ years ago diminish the fact that Ms. Smith actually BELIEVED what she was singing? And, if so, why?
​
Click to expand...
IMHO, this is the most idiotic things I've heard in a long time. Are any of her lyrics in the same category as what current day's rap profanity as art? Philadelphia has gone mad.
 
Lutherf said:
I don't know why we need to pick on just Kate Smith. All white people are racist and, frankly, the only way to solve the problem of racism will be to get rid of white people, white culture and anything else that might be considered too "white" for polite society.
Click to expand...

What's white culture?
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
You are going to have to work REALLY hard to convince me that "America The Beautiful" "extolled reprehensible notions".
...
Click to expand...
Did you even read the article ("Yankees dump Kate Smith’s 'God Bless America' from rotation over singer’s racist songs") to which you, in your OP, linked? I don't think you did.
  1. I have neither will nor reason to convince you that "America the Beautiful" extolled reprehensible notions.
  2. AFAIK, no great number of folks or any major sports teams' management/owners have a problem with "America the Beautiful."
  3. "America the Beautiful" and "God Bless America" are different songs. Kate Smith is renowned for singing the latter, not the former.



  4. AFAIK, no organizations object to "God Bless America" (GBA)
  5. The article you referenced states clearly that the Yankees "ditched [Smith's rendition of GBA] altogether this season, replacing [it] with different versions of the song" because they learned of "Smith’s history of potential racism." Specific instances include:
    • Smith's recording the offensive jingle, "Pickaninny Heaven," which she directed at "colored children" who should fantasize about an amazing place with "great big watermelons."
      • She shot a video for that song that takes place in an orphanage for black children, and much of the imagery is startlingly racist.
    • Smith recorded, "That’s Why Darkies Were Born," which included the lyrics, "Someone had to pick the cotton. … That’s why darkies were born."
    • Smith endorsed the "Mammy Doll," which was based on a racist "Aunt Jemima" caricature of a black woman.
  6. The article clearly states that prior to dropping Smith's version of GBA, the Yankees were evaluating changes in their music lineup.


TU Curmudgeon said:
...


I'm not sure what you mean by "ethically/morally speaking, are existentially right/wrong".


Both ethics and morality derive from society and are only right or wrong in the context of a society. If the society changes, then so too does the definition of "right" and the definition of "wrong".

ex·is·ten·tial
/ˌeɡzəˈsten(t)SH(ə)l/
adjective
adjective: existential

relating to existence.

...​


Possibly you mean "intrinsically" rather than "existentially".
Click to expand...
Blue:
No, I didn't and don't, but some may use that term; however, I didn't because "intrinsic" is refers to tangible nouns rather than intangible ones. "Inherent" would thus be a better alternative for it lacks the tangibility connotation/correlate. To illustrate, I'll share how my high school English teacher explained the difference:
We, we who've mastered English, speak of intrinsic beauty of "e=mc[SUP]2[/SUP]" and the Pythagorean theorem, but not their inherent beauty. In contrast, we think of steel as inherently strong, not as intrinsically strong.​

Aside:
I don't recall the specific example he used. What I recall is the point and the "we who've mastered English," which is a phrase he often used when we inquired about nuances of grammar, vocabulary, diction, and the like....

"Well, you see, Master 'Xelor,' we who've mastered English...."

Years later at a class reunion, I joked with my teacher about the many pompous and/or condescending sounding things he said. He replied, "Had I not, would you've remembered them? You and your classmates, perhaps on the weekends or in study hall, mimicked things I said and how I said them. Yes? Doing so put that **** in your head, and to this day, you remember and apply it. Do you not?"

We'd never got caught aping his parlance -- there'd have been trouble had we -- yet he knew we'd done so. His methods worked as he'd intended...Point taken.​

I meant existentially: having being in time and space. "Exists only, always and forever as" is a phrase having the same meaning as "existentially." It also lacks the tangibility/intangibility connotations of "intrinsic" and "inherent."
  • Fish are existentially water dwellers.
  • Murder is existentially wrong.
  • Water is existentially fluid.
  • Racism is existentially wrong.
  • Charity is existentially right.
I mean certain things are morally right/wrong and have been, are and will forever be so, no matter what cultures may variously condone and/or not. Racism, for instance, was wrong in the past and it's wrong today and it'll be so in the future. That some folks knew, know or will know so has nothing to do with whether it is.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
Obviously, we cannot undo the past, but we can eschew exhibiting its ethical errancy. And, frankly, why would one not do just that?
-- Xelor
Click to expand...

...
Well then, why not simply expunge anything that doesn't conform to CURRENT "revealed wisdom" concerning "right" or "wrong". Let's start with expunging any mention of any of the Founding Fathers who owned slaves. Then we can move on to expunging any mention of any person who was involved in the attempted extermination of America's original inhabitants. Then we can move on to expunging any mention of any person who was involved with the internment of "Japanese-Americans". Then we can move on to expunging any mention of any person who was involved in "McCarthyism". Then we can double back and expunge any mention of any person who was involved in KKK (or any other "racist organized") violence. Then we can move forward again and expunge any mention of anyone who was involved in the "theft" of Hawai'i from the Hawai'ians. Then, after a bit more tidying up of American history we can move on to clean out the cesspits of world history and expunge any mention of the Nazis, or the Crusades, or the religious wars in Europe, or the subjugation of the African continent.
Click to expand...

Red:
??? -- Because the past cannot be altered, thus expungement isn't possible.

My remarks hadn't anything to do with expungement. They had to do with ceasing to extol.


We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorns have roses.
-- Alphonse Karr, A Tour Round My Garden​


Blue:
Context: the interrelated conditions in which something exists or occurs

I recognize your attempt at reductio, but it doesn't work in your argument because of the huge multidimensional contextual differences appertaining respectively to Kate Smith and the Founding Fathers. The reductio technique is effectual only when the contexts of the things compared and subsequently exaggerated are congruent or so nearly so as to make no difference. Your argument above disregards all but one element of context, thus transforming reductio into one suffering from its slippery slope line. It's not that the structure of your line is, for this venue, so amiss, it's the overarching contextual elision that makes the "reasoning" uncogent.
  • Is the fact of Smith's singing "God Bless America," and the happenstance of people liking it, in any way shape or form comparable to the fact of the Founders having violently revolted against their government, against their king, and written the US' founding document? No!
    • For whatever similarities those acts may share, is there any comparable consequentiality among them? Not remotely!
  • Is it at all possible to, in any substantive way, speak of the US and its history without in some way acknowledging and mentioning the deeds of the Founders? No!
    • Can the same be credibly said of Kate Smith or anything she did? No. However beloved she was/is, she was but an entertainer.
    • Would one's knowledge and comprehension of US history be materially incomplete were one to not learn of the Founders? Yes!
      • Can the same be credibly said of Kate Smith and anything she ever did? No!
  • Are there any alternatives to the Founding fathers? No!
    • Are there alternatives to Kate Smith or her rendition of "God Bless America?" Yes, plenty of them!
For all the above reasons, while we cannot expunge mention of the Founders, we can do without Kate Smith's rendition of "God Bless America;" moreover, the vast majority of us can do without ever mentioning or hearing her name or knowing she ever existed. Does that mean recondite and/or specialized texts or documentary films about American songstresses, the history of baseball, popular music of the 1930s to 'some date,' popular propagators of racist canards and tropes, racism in entertainment, etc. need to refrain from mentioning her and her songs? No.

Though usually adroit enough where her own interests were concerned, she made the mistake, not uncommon to persons in whom the social habits are instinctive, of supposing that the inability to acquire them quickly implies a general dulness. Because a bluebottle bangs irrationally against a window-pane, the drawing-room naturalist may forget that under less artificial conditions it is capable of measuring distances and drawing conclusions with all the accuracy needful to its welfare...
-- Edith Wharton, The House of Mirth
​
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
True.



Also true, but what is your point?



Please advise of the URL of the website for your campaign to expunge both "Washington's Birthday" and "Columbus Day" from the calendar as soon as you have got it set up.



Your holding up a person who you, yourself, admit was a "racist" as a good example or even admitting that they did some good things is totally repugnant to any right thinking person (and also contradicts your previously stated position).



Agreed. Everyone who has ever done anything that is - today - considered even remotely "racist" must be totally expunged from the history books.

Heaven help you if the definition of "racist" ever changes so that you fall inside that category.
Click to expand...

See the post 56 linked-to content about context. It's clear you struggle to comprehensively perceive the dimensions of context.

For instance, I wrote:
My dad was, roughly, among Smith's contemporaries. There's plenty Granddaddy did and thought that I hold in high regard, but his racist notions aren't among them. Even as I will acknowledge and embrace the good Granddaddy did, there are others who, sans his racism, the same or substantially similar good things. In choosing between Granddaddy and one of those other folks' as a figure whose legacy and life I tacitly idolize in a broad public setting such as a baseball game, I'll pick one of those other folks.​

...and you responded with...

Your holding up a person who you, yourself, admit was a "racist" as a good example or even admitting that they did some good things is totally repugnant to any right thinking person (and also contradicts your previously stated position).​

...I don't know how you managed to do so, but you completely missed the meaning of the final sentence in my paragraph. That sentence indicates I wouldn't at all "hold up" my grandfather as an exemplary anything pertaining to the matter of race, other than perhaps, and as I did, to illustrate something that's amiss about how folks construe race and white people's foul attitudes about non-white folks.
 
Lutherf said:
Hey! A lot of people post a lot of stupid **** around here!

The fact that you ****ers see racism in absolutely everything is just the tip of the iceberg. For the past 10 years it’s been the left wing calling everybody that isn’t them racist, sexist, homophobic, deplorable, etc. Sometimes the rest of us just get fed up with your self righteousness.
Click to expand...

So sick of right wing victim-hood culture. So whiny and bitchy.
 
Xelor said:
Did you even read the article ("Yankees dump Kate Smith’s 'God Bless America' from rotation over singer’s racist songs") to which you, in your OP, linked? I don't think you did.
  1. I have neither will nor reason to convince you that "America the Beautiful" extolled reprehensible notions.
  2. AFAIK, no great number of folks or any major sports teams' management/owners have a problem with "America the Beautiful."
  3. "America the Beautiful" and "God Bless America" are different songs. Kate Smith is renowned for singing the latter, not the former.



  4. AFAIK, no organizations object to "God Bless America" (GBA)
  5. The article you referenced states clearly that the Yankees "ditched [Smith's rendition of GBA] altogether this season, replacing [it] with different versions of the song" because they learned of "Smith’s history of potential racism." Specific instances include:
    • Smith's recording the offensive jingle, "Pickaninny Heaven," which she directed at "colored children" who should fantasize about an amazing place with "great big watermelons."
      • She shot a video for that song that takes place in an orphanage for black children, and much of the imagery is startlingly racist.
    • Smith recorded, "That’s Why Darkies Were Born," which included the lyrics, "Someone had to pick the cotton. … That’s why darkies were born."
    • Smith endorsed the "Mammy Doll," which was based on a racist "Aunt Jemima" caricature of a black woman.
  6. The article clearly states that prior to dropping Smith's version of GBA, the Yankees were evaluating changes in their music lineup.



Blue:
No, I didn't and don't, but some may use that term; however, I didn't because "intrinsic" is refers to tangible nouns rather than intangible ones. "Inherent" would thus be a better alternative for it lacks the tangibility connotation/correlate. To illustrate, I'll share how my high school English teacher explained the difference:
We, we who've mastered English, speak of intrinsic beauty of "e=mc[SUP]2[/SUP]" and the Pythagorean theorem, but not their inherent beauty. In contrast, we think of steel as inherently strong, not as intrinsically strong.​

Aside:
I don't recall the specific example he used. What I recall is the point and the "we who've mastered English," which is a phrase he often used when we inquired about nuances of grammar, vocabulary, diction, and the like....

"Well, you see, Master 'Xelor,' we who've mastered English...."

Years later at a class reunion, I joked with my teacher about the many pompous and/or condescending sounding things he said. He replied, "Had I not, would you've remembered them? You and your classmates, perhaps on the weekends or in study hall, mimicked things I said and how I said them. Yes? Doing so put that **** in your head, and to this day, you remember and apply it. Do you not?"

We'd never got caught aping his parlance -- there'd have been trouble had we -- yet he knew we'd done so. His methods worked as he'd intended...Point taken.​

I meant existentially: having being in time and space. "Exists only, always and forever as" is a phrase having the same meaning as "existentially." It also lacks the tangibility/intangibility connotations of "intrinsic" and "inherent."
  • Fish are existentially water dwellers.
  • Murder is existentially wrong.
  • Water is existentially fluid.
  • Racism is existentially wrong.
  • Charity is existentially right.
I mean certain things are morally right/wrong and have been, are and will forever be so, no matter what cultures may variously condone and/or not. Racism, for instance, was wrong in the past and it's wrong today and it'll be so in the future. That some folks knew, know or will know so has nothing to do with whether it is.
Click to expand...


My apologies, I have difficulty remembering which schmaltzy, jingoist, song is which and got the title wrong.

PS - I seldom debate the actual meaning of words with Humpty-Dumptyists", so feel free to use whatever word you want to use to mean whatever you want it to mean.
 
I'm just wondering what the reasoning behind her odd song "That's why darkies were born" was? It seems to be insult mixed with praise. Probably just a condescending person looking down at someone they find inferior and attempting to access their worth.

I don't blame them for wanting to take her statue down. It's not inspirational anymore is it? And isn't that why it's supposed to be up there?
 
JC Callender said:
I'm just wondering what the reasoning behind her odd song "That's why darkies were born" was?
Click to expand...

One of the reasons why people write songs is so that they can make money out of sales/royalties.

If there is no market for a song, people tend not to write it.

Someone (not Ms. Smith) DID write the song.

Draw your own conclusions as to whether or not there was a market for it when it was written.
 
The Mark said:
Yes.

They didn't fully understand the concept, at the time.
Click to expand...

It is silly to judge someone's actions and words from 1780 with the lense of 2019.

It is equally silly to start removing statues. This is such a silly argument used by the left.

Should we remove George Washington and Thomas Jefferson's face off Mount Rushmore?

Are we going to bomb George Washington's library? How about Thomas Jefferson?

How about removing LBJ's statue or Robert Byrd's?

Instead of judging a man by his 3 worst comments/actions let's evaluate the totality of their contributions towards society.
 
Bucky said:
It is silly to judge someone's actions and words from 1780 with the lense of 2019.

It is equally silly to start removing statues. This is such a silly argument used by the left.

Should we remove George Washington and Thomas Jefferson's face off Mount Rushmore?

Are we going to bomb George Washington's library? How about Thomas Jefferson?

How about removing LBJ's statue or Robert Byrd's?

Instead of judging a man by his 3 worst comments/actions let's evaluate the totality of their contributions towards society.
Click to expand...
We need to understand them in context, and that context includes actions which today are considered unacceptable.

It doesn't make their entire life worthless, but it is part of the context they are framed in.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
From Heavy

Kate Smith’s ‘Racist Songs’: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know
​

Kate Smith, a popular Depression-era American singer, is most famous for her version of “God Bless America.” The song is played often at sporting events, including national and professional leagues and teams.

Not anymore. At least for the Philadelphia Flyers and the New York Yankees.

In reports and statements, both teams have said that having recently learned about Smith’s history of racist songs, she’s been dumped.

Smith, who died in 1986, was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 1982 by then-Pres. Ronald Reagan.

Here’s what you need to know:

COMMENT:-

Although it's going just a bit too far to say that if a trio composed of Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin, and Pol Pot were to sing "God Bless America" with the same quality of sincerity as Ms. Smith sang it then I'd play it regardless, it isn't completely outside the realm of possibility that I would either.

Does what someone did 90+ years ago diminish the fact that Ms. Smith actually BELIEVED what she was singing? And, if so, why?
​
Click to expand...

In the 1950's, many a KKK'er who lynched a black man loved that song too. So yea, what happened 90 years ago does matter.
 
Lutherf said:
I don't know why we need to pick on just Kate Smith. All white people are racist and, frankly, the only way to solve the problem of racism will be to get rid of white people, white culture and anything else that might be considered too "white" for polite society.
Click to expand...

Well why are you waiting? Go for it and see what happens. You had you chance when We had America's Last Black President.
God bless Kate Smith.
 
rhinefire said:
Well why are you waiting? Go for it and see what happens. You had you chance when We had America's Last Black President.
God bless Kate Smith.
Click to expand...

Woah there, take that foot off the race war gas pedal. He's on your side.
 
The Mark said:
Yes.

They didn't fully understand the concept, at the time.
Click to expand...

Not true. Many of them understood the concept all too well and the moral contradiction and hypocrisy of it gnawed at a great many of them.
 
danarhea said:
In the 1950's, many a KKK'er who lynched a black man loved that song too. So yea, what happened 90 years ago does matter.
Click to expand...

Thank you for providing the germ of the perfect solution.

What just HASTA be done is for anything that is in anyway associated with anything that is no longer "acceptable" to be totally EXPUNGED from the public consciousness.

Fortunately we don't actually have to go back prior to the 10th Century because there is no reasonably concrete evidence that anyone other than "The Natives" lived in any part of North America prior to that date.

The first thing that has to be done is to EXPUNGE all mention of the Vikings, because the Vikings slaughtered "The Natives" (admittedly not as successfully as later groups, but, hey, "evil is evil" right?

Then we have to EXPUNGE any mention of those murderous invaders led by Christopher Columbus (or whatever his real name actually was).

Then we have to EXPUNGE any mention of those so-called "Colonists" who murdered and enslaved "The Natives".

Then we have to EXPUNGE any mention of any of those slave-holding, male chauvinist, elitists who comprised the so-called "Founding Fathers".

Then we have to EXPUNGE any mention of those evil people who actually bought people wholesale in Louisiana and Alaska.

Then we have to EXPUNGE any mention of those foul people who lived in the so-called "Confederacy".

Then we have to EXPUNGE any mention of those evil racists who used the power of the American government and military to drive "The Natives" from the lands that had been guaranteed to them in perpetuity (and to slaughter "The Natives" if "The Natives" showed any reluctance to being driven from their own land).

Then we have to EXPUNGE any mention of "Jim Crowism" and everything associated with it.

Then we have to EXPUNGE any mention of the illegal and racist forcing of American citizens into concentration camps based purely on race.

Then we have to EXPUNGE any mention of the fact that the US government violated the laws of the United States of America in order to take in Nazi (and Japanese) people who committed war crimes (on the basis that those people would be "useful" to the US government) [Of course, maybe it won't be necessary to do that because those people are totally innocent since they were never tried and/or convicted so all that will have to be done is to "clean up their resumes a bit.]

Then we have to EXPUNGE any mention of any human rights violations committed by governments installed and/or supported by the government of the United States of America.

On the whole, America's school children will greet this "historical cleansing" with hosannas because it will mean that "American History" would them become a one week course with nothing whatsoever about it that they have to remember.
 
Lutherf said:
I don't know why we need to pick on just Kate Smith. All white people are racist and, frankly, the only way to solve the problem of racism will be to get rid of white people, white culture and anything else that might be considered too "white" for polite society.
Click to expand...

That's a crazy statement, just as crazy as saying maybe the answer is to get rid of all the races other than white.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
Thank you for providing the germ of the perfect solution.

What just HASTA be done is for anything that is in anyway associated with anything that is no longer "acceptable" to be totally EXPUNGED from the public consciousness.

Fortunately we don't actually have to go back prior to the 10th Century because there is no reasonably concrete evidence that anyone other than "The Natives" lived in any part of North America prior to that date.

The first thing that has to be done is to EXPUNGE all mention of the Vikings, because the Vikings slaughtered "The Natives" (admittedly not as successfully as later groups, but, hey, "evil is evil" right?

Then we have to EXPUNGE any mention of those murderous invaders led by Christopher Columbus (or whatever his real name actually was).

Then we have to EXPUNGE any mention of those so-called "Colonists" who murdered and enslaved "The Natives".

Then we have to EXPUNGE any mention of any of those slave-holding, male chauvinist, elitists who comprised the so-called "Founding Fathers".

Then we have to EXPUNGE any mention of those evil people who actually bought people wholesale in Louisiana and Alaska.

Then we have to EXPUNGE any mention of those foul people who lived in the so-called "Confederacy".

Then we have to EXPUNGE any mention of those evil racists who used the power of the American government and military to drive "The Natives" from the lands that had been guaranteed to them in perpetuity (and to slaughter "The Natives" if "The Natives" showed any reluctance to being driven from their own land).

Then we have to EXPUNGE any mention of "Jim Crowism" and everything associated with it.

Then we have to EXPUNGE any mention of the illegal and racist forcing of American citizens into concentration camps based purely on race.

Then we have to EXPUNGE any mention of the fact that the US government violated the laws of the United States of America in order to take in Nazi (and Japanese) people who committed war crimes (on the basis that those people would be "useful" to the US government) [Of course, maybe it won't be necessary to do that because those people are totally innocent since they were never tried and/or convicted so all that will have to be done is to "clean up their resumes a bit.]

Then we have to EXPUNGE any mention of any human rights violations committed by governments installed and/or supported by the government of the United States of America.

On the whole, America's school children will greet this "historical cleansing" with hosannas because it will mean that "American History" would them become a one week course with nothing whatsoever about it that they have to remember.
Click to expand...

History is not always nice, but as the saying goes, "you have to understand where you come from to know where you are going". If you want to chance you have to understand where you started and why you need to change.
Condemning what people in the past did is fine but removing it all from history is ignorance.
Why are we not condemning current music that advocates abuse of women, and gangsta rap? If we are going to blame cultural influences for the problems, get rid of unfavorable cultural influences.
The answer is to teach history, teach right from wrong, and work to put better policies and cultural characteristics in place.
 
Integrityrespec said:
History is not always nice, but as the saying goes, "you have to understand where you come from to know where you are going". If you want to chance you have to understand where you started and why you need to change.
Condemning what people in the past did is fine but removing it all from history is ignorance.
Why are we not condemning current music that advocates abuse of women, and gangsta rap? If we are going to blame cultural influences for the problems, get rid of unfavorable cultural influences.
The answer is to teach history, teach right from wrong, and work to put better policies and cultural characteristics in place.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately your solution (which I happen to agree with) is NOT one that is recommended by either "The Educational Establishment" or "The Political Establishment", hence the odds on it being implemented - under current conditions - are slightly lower than the odds on me (a 75 year old male) getting pregnant.
 
JC Callender said:
I'm just wondering what the reasoning behind her odd song "That's why darkies were born" was? It seems to be insult mixed with praise. Probably just a condescending person looking down at someone they find inferior and attempting to access their worth.

I don't blame them for wanting to take her statue down. It's not inspirational anymore is it? And isn't that why it's supposed to be up there?
Click to expand...

It's.

A.

Satire.

The song.

Satire.

Pro-black.

Satire.
 
Last edited:
Atomic Kid said:
Not true. Many of them understood the concept all too well and the moral contradiction and hypocrisy of it gnawed at a great many of them.
Click to expand...

Every time Jefferson raped a slave, something gnawed at him.

And it wasn't the rats in the barn! :shock:

The man a dam he-ro.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
Thank you for providing the germ of the perfect solution.

What just HASTA be done is for anything that is in anyway associated with anything that is no longer "acceptable" to be totally EXPUNGED from the public consciousness.

Fortunately we don't actually have to go back prior to the 10th Century because there is no reasonably concrete evidence that anyone other than "The Natives" lived in any part of North America prior to that date.

The first thing that has to be done is to EXPUNGE all mention of the Vikings, because the Vikings slaughtered "The Natives" (admittedly not as successfully as later groups, but, hey, "evil is evil" right?

Then we have to EXPUNGE any mention of those murderous invaders led by Christopher Columbus (or whatever his real name actually was).

Then we have to EXPUNGE any mention of those so-called "Colonists" who murdered and enslaved "The Natives".

Then we have to EXPUNGE any mention of any of those slave-holding, male chauvinist, elitists who comprised the so-called "Founding Fathers".

Then we have to EXPUNGE any mention of those evil people who actually bought people wholesale in Louisiana and Alaska.

Then we have to EXPUNGE any mention of those foul people who lived in the so-called "Confederacy".

Then we have to EXPUNGE any mention of those evil racists who used the power of the American government and military to drive "The Natives" from the lands that had been guaranteed to them in perpetuity (and to slaughter "The Natives" if "The Natives" showed any reluctance to being driven from their own land).

Then we have to EXPUNGE any mention of "Jim Crowism" and everything associated with it.

Then we have to EXPUNGE any mention of the illegal and racist forcing of American citizens into concentration camps based purely on race.

Then we have to EXPUNGE any mention of the fact that the US government violated the laws of the United States of America in order to take in Nazi (and Japanese) people who committed war crimes (on the basis that those people would be "useful" to the US government) [Of course, maybe it won't be necessary to do that because those people are totally innocent since they were never tried and/or convicted so all that will have to be done is to "clean up their resumes a bit.]

Then we have to EXPUNGE any mention of any human rights violations committed by governments installed and/or supported by the government of the United States of America.

On the whole, America's school children will greet this "historical cleansing" with hosannas because it will mean that "American History" would them become a one week course with nothing whatsoever about it that they have to remember.
Click to expand...

Say on, brother!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom