QatzelOk wrote:Shouldn't the Redskins be a prominent feature of the Holocaust Memorial? Why "remember" foreign enemies genocides, only to forget the ones that were perpetrated by the same people touring the museum?
It's just leftist virtue signalling, nothing more. The people who really care about the Holocaust are Jews themselves, and they want everyone else to remember perhaps as a hope that it won't happen again. For whatever reason, some Jews seem to really piss people off wherever they settle throughout the course of history, leading others to a pique of frustration where they conclude all Jews are a problem and then engage in pogroms, forced removals, ghettoizing, genocide, or whatever. Remembering the Holocaust in the United States seems somewhat pointless, since the US didn't perpetrate it and it didn't happen in the United States. It also didn't happen to Americans.
I don't think America is particularly sorry about displacing Native Americans. If we had to do it all over again, it's very likely that we would.
I have given extensive discourses on the history of American football, and it seems most people are hopelessly ignorant of it and the role that Native Americans played in shaping the sport. In that time frame, minorities were not given to exhibits of self pity and so forth.
Sivad wrote:Genocide isn't unique to any one culture, I'm sure plenty of Native tribes wiped out neighboring tribes.
As a term, it has already been watered down from trying to exterminate a race or ethnicity to simply displacing a population. So it is something of a "loser's lament."
QatzelOk wrote:This statement you have made is called "post-modernism" by people who hate post-modernism. Erasing the meaning of history by criticizing the use of language to make statements - is what you have done.
Yes, but the purpose of this stuff is typically to get people to subscribe to left-leaning political ideas. For example, I'm regularly called a racist, sexist, etc. I really do not care, because I understand it to mean that I am not a leftist. At work, I'm moving to a new team and had to hire my replacement. My final choice is a woman in India. In other words, I am not choosing someone who is white. I am not choosing a man. I am not choosing an American. I root for Donald Trump here, because Trump trashes political correctness, which I loath, and he promotes civic nationalism. I don't lament every horrible thing done to every group everywhere all the time. I am also comfortable noting differences or tendencies among different population groups. For those reasons, I am routinely labelled as racist, sexist, homophobe, islamophobe and so forth. Yet, this is all about parroting social attitudes, and has absolutely nothing to do with how a person actually behaves. In hiring an Indian woman to fill my role, my chief concerns are: one, she doesn't have a lot of experience with APIs, but she does have a degree in electrical engineering so I'm not too concerned; two, she is not from an open-source software background, which is considerably more freewheeling than typical fortune 500 environments; and third, she is in Bangalore, and wants to arrive early and leave early, because she has small children to look after. With the time zone difference, that may present challenges. At no point in my decision making does race, gender or nationlity factor in to my decision, but since I do not subscribe to the political left's dogma nor parrot it, I am criticized relentlessly for the suspicion of doing the sorts of "hateful" acts that I do not do. What makes you think that people should take your sense of aggrievement so seriously?
"@arianahuff is unattractive both inside and out. I fully understand why her former husband left her for a man - he made a good decision."
-- Donald J. Trump