
Unfortunately, you're sharing October with Italians
Moderators: Bill_Abner, ScoopBrady
The irony here of course is that as you say, Veteran's Day was originally Armistice Day and was designated to represent a very specific group of people- those who had died in the First World War. Then it got rolled up into something completely different thanks to pressure from veteran's groups, a.k.a. the NAACP for soldiers. Everything works the same- only the names change.reeche wrote:As I said, I disagree. Vets are a designated group in this case. Distinct from the normal american in a way because of something that society values because of their contribution in this case. At least that's the intent behind the holiday to commerate it. (At least it is now since it's no longer really Armistice Day). I would make the same case for the groups in this country that have been historially discriminated against (and here's the controversial bit. Continue to suffer the effects of) above and beyond all others. Whether they are black or American Indian or whatever doesn't bother me in the least.Reech when you use the Veterans Day anology it doesn't work. Veterans are made up of many different races. Every Vet is included. Black history month is showcasing one race.
We have 9 months of school in the US. Why not give the Hispanics and Asians a month? Hell, the Native Americans should get 2 IMO.
Why not incorperate all races into American history. Our melting pot society is what makes America special.
Personally I've never been one who bought into the melting pot theory but that's just me. A melting pot implies just that. All the major distinctions have been melted away and assimilated. That is not the case for many minority groups in this country. People talk about fixing history and making it "American History" and everytime I get a chance to look at some school level history book, it does a piss poor job of it. In some fantasy world where everybody was truly equal, then I would get the argument that you don't have to take special effort to do these sort of things to send out "messages" and morals to your society. Their would be no need for a Veteran's Day, Black History Month, etc. For someone who has the financial means of Morgan Freeman, I'm sure the current world almost must seem like that place. For the majority of African-Americans in this case I'm betting they neither agree with his opinion nor have this view of the world. That's fine also. Not everybody has to be in lock-step in their opinions on issues.
Good points man. I agree. It's really a question of how much al kid wants to know about history. I love history. My history classes covered the basics. I wanted more so I hit the public library and went to town.seanmac31 wrote: The irony here of course is that as you say, Veteran's Day was originally Armistice Day and was designated to represent a very specific group of people- those who had died in the First World War. Then it got rolled up into something completely different thanks to pressure from veteran's groups, a.k.a. the NAACP for soldiers. Everything works the same- only the names change.
I'm very sympathetic to the cause of addressing the underrepresentaton of the black experience in American history, along with the Asian experience, the Native American experience and, most obviously missing of all, the woman's experience. For the most part, this stuff simply isn't in middle school or high school level history courses. At best, it gets a few special boxes in a 400 page history book. There's no reason why you should have to go to college to find out about the Chinese population in California, and there's no reason why Denzel Washington should have to get approached about making a movie on the topic before he ever finds out that hundreds of thousands of black soldiers fought for the North in the Civil War. All that said, I don't think Black History Month is a very effective way to go about things. It's a band-aid put over a gaping wound.