What changed that made this necessary in September 2021?
1 Like
My post is IMHO absolutely correct.
I stand as one who is sick and tired of WokeFolk attacking our country, our freedom, our history, and our kids future.
I have every right to object to the distruction of monuments, to the idea that disagreeing with lefties is somehow an act of racism, with attempts to portray our founding as some act of racism…
The only thing you folks have accomplished is a serious watering down of the very serious issue of racism. It now means next to nothing.
To be honest The Federalist is a helluva lot more credible than the smartest guy in the room lefties who knowingly spread misinformation about a multitude of stories over the last few years.
4 Likes
Would you have rather the South been able to steamroll the convention?
The slave states wanted ALL of their slaves counted as people for congressional representation purposes. That would have given them even more power than they already had. They would have dominated congress.
The 3/5th compromise limited slave state power as much as it could at that time.
It wasn’t a judgement on whether slaves were human or not. To the slaver south, they weren’t but they still wanted them to count for congressional representation to increase their power in the house. The non-slave state northern representatives thought that was preposterous and fought against it tooth and nail.
The 3/5ths was the only compromise that they could come up with. The south won the debate, but it didn’t get all of the domineering congressional power that it wanted to.
1 Like
It’s outraging over stuff like this that keeps Republicans in the culture war outrage cycle…if only they could focus…
3 Likes
You’re wasting your time. They have been told that 10k times.
1 Like
I’m not a republican, I’m a liberal.
1 Like
Is this an isolated event or indicative of a larger trend?
Cheaper and less time consuming to place a warning on the site, than to go through thousands of documents.
Yes, the government is known for cost and time efficiency.
What changed that this was needed in Sept 2021?
1 Like
Probably some woke admin was hired, and decided a warning needed to be placed.
Not a big deal.
It doesn’t take being “woke” to understand that perhaps the great Founding Ideal of our nation that “All men are created equal” cannot be rectified with what happened for basically the next 200 years afterward.
Was the founding of the country an “act of racsim”? I don’t think so. But it did enshrine a continued State Sponsored subjugation of a race for the next hundred years and a State sponsored oppression for hundred more after that. So how do we talk about that? How does that conversation actually happen? How do we rectify those two things. I don’t think that we can. We must accept those contradictions and failures and understand the progress that has been made in spite of all those who labored and shed blood to keep that system in place.
So when the National Archive Catalog places a content warning on their searchable collection that some may find some of the material to be objectionable and the warning is there because they do not want to take it down… to sanitize history but leave it there warts and all because that is important and a hack culture war publication comes along to proclaim that the woke libs put a warning label on the Constitution when that is clearly not the point of taking that action… it kind of saddens me. It shows that not only are there very bad faith institutions out there but there are enough people primed to accept their outrage that those bad faith efforts can continue on.
4 Likes
Not a big deal. They’re counting on you.
1 Like
Good post. It’s all horse hockey of course, but the effort is there.
What changed that it was needed now? Who was going to make them “take it down”?
1 Like
Counting on me for what? Shrug at content warnings?
Yes…
Are trigger warnings going to have to go in front of every news blurb? Every magazine article? Every publication that anyone can remotely find offensive? My god, are people that sensitive that they need advance warning for every little thing they could possibly find offensive?
Have we reached the point where we need a right to not be offended included in the Bill of Rights?
I couldn’t imagine living my life like that.
4 Likes
And I should be concerned about content warnings? Why?
Why have you not torn down the brand new statue put up honoring the buffalo soldiers who were murders? It needs to go right?
Because of the content.
Exactly…that’s beautifully said.
There is nothing that we can do in life that won’t offend someone…whether what we do is genuinely offensive or not.
I talk into a microphone for a living every day…about to head to the airport to go to work…you d be amazed at the inconsequential things people find offensive…and I try very hard to water everything down so as not to piss someone off. It’s just not possible. (The reason I’m in this forum is it’s the one place where I can say what’s really on my mind.)
Trigger warnings on the documents and reference materials that created this country.
Instead of encouraging everyone to be offended daily how about we start prioritizing that which is important…to understand that attitudes and actions change generation after generation…the world George Washington lived on was different from today. What’s life going to be like 200 years from now. There is no reason to be offended by Washington’s America…but rather to be inspired by what he has Jefferson and the rest created.
I fully expect sometime in my remaining lifetime to see a move to remove the Washington Monument, the Jefferson Memorial, like it or not alleged racism 200-300 years ago is being weaponized by the left to re organize this country…
And we all better realize that we don’t want to live in a world where people can be randomly silenced just because someone is “offended”.
2 Likes
