White History Month.

[Abatael]

If the whites didn't enslave, oppress and discriminate against blacks there'd have been no need for a Black History Month to begin with.

Y'all brought it upon yourselves.

Cry me a river, then build a bridge over that river and get the fuck over it.

[Luepola]

If I'm not mistaken, part of the reason for Black History month is to honor ethnic groups that have been put down throughout much of modern history, at least in our country.

Light-skinned people, however, have usually had it made. I don't see why they need a month to honor their heritage and its 'past struggles' when they have hardly ever been put through strife.

A 'white history month' would be a good idea in a country where the majority of the population is non-white (but there are enough whites there for such an implementation to be worthwhile), and certain whites have done noteworthy and memorable actions that helped whites through especially hard struggles and, in the end, benefited that nation as a whole, as was the case with the African-Americans in the US. Before anyone says 'Africa', white people there who are/were persecuted at all are/were persecuted out of the fear and jealousy that the locals have for them, rather than because they are/were poor and easily exploitable, as was, again, the case with African-Americans.

In short, a white history month would only be viable and reasonable under certain circumstances.

[Khorsun]

If we were to get a white history month, sure, I'd be all for it. I'd pay it just as much attention as I pay Black History Month.

By which I mean I will find something that says "It's White History Month," then go, "Guess it's White History Month. Huh," and then go back to whatever I was doing.

[Aurora Novus]

There's shouldn't be a "X racial/cultural group" month period. White history, black history, it's all just part of "history".

Some teachers and schools are biased/mind-washing and purposefully remove some important reflecting points of History narratives that are fair to more diverse voices in it and contemporary societies. Or they are just too Eurocentric to self-criticize.

If teachers are not teaching properly, you replace the teacher. You don't have "x history month".

Further more, the complaint about "eurocentrism" I find to be a silly complaint. As most history classes either are (1) the history of your own nation, or (2) global history, of course it's going to be eurocentric. What else would you expect it to be? They're teaching history on a grand scale. European cultue and philosophy has had more of a global political impact than any other culture. Further more, just like how they have in-depth studies for your own country of origin, taking foreign language classes often coincide with cultural studies as well. It's not as if they don't teach this stuff. They just force what they think is important, and leave open what might interest you.

[Kaztropol]

at one time, in port cities such as New York, black dock workers had the less dangerous jobs, while Irish dock workers were given the more dangerous jobs. The reason for this was that black slaves were more expensive than Irish indentured servants, and much harder to replace.

Times change.

There's a quote, in one of the Dune novels, runs along lines of "Those who would repeat history, must control the teaching of it". May be applicable, as is the "Those who fail to learn from history, are doomed to repeat it", which is more well known.

There are a whole lot of historical stories and details that are missed because schools just do not have the time available to cover things.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Source?

Yes, they wanted to put up a quota, but not because of any "flood".

I have some data on the elite academic institutions putting an effective quota on Jewish students. Yale had highly precise demands of take only five Jews, no more than 200 Italian Americans, and no blacks at all in 1935. It also explains the legacy clauses were created as a response to the numbers of Jews.

I'm not seeing anything in that link regarding the amount of Jewish enrollment previous to the quotas. "Flood" is a subjective term. Ten? Fifty? One hundred?

[The Serbian Empire]

I have some data on the elite academic institutions putting an effective quota on Jewish students. Yale had highly precise demands of take only five Jews, no more than 200 Italian Americans, and no blacks at all in 1935. It also explains the legacy clauses were created as a response to the numbers of Jews.

I'm not seeing anything in that link regarding the amount of Jewish enrollment previous to the quotas. "Flood" is a subjective term. Ten? Fifty? One hundred?

The flood was more like 30% of students being Jewish compared to the percentage of population being about 1 to 3% Jewish at the time. 10 times more Jews than would be expected.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

I'm not seeing anything in that link regarding the amount of Jewish enrollment previous to the quotas. "Flood" is a subjective term. Ten? Fifty? One hundred?

The flood was more like 30% of students being Jewish compared to the percentage of population being about 1 to 3% Jewish at the time. 10 times more Jews than would be expected.

I'm not seeing that in your link. Not saying that it's untrue, it's just not there.

[The Pan-Slavian Union]

Black History month is understandable, as Black Americans do have a specific inspirational and relevant history, but White history month?

There's no point. It's far too vague. You can't cover the history of numerous continents in one celebration, unless you're going to call it "History" month.

[Abatael]

Black History month is understandable, as Black Americans do have a specific inspirational and relevant history, but White history month?

There's no point. It's far too vague. You can't cover the history of numerous continents in one celebration, unless you're going to call it "History" month.

There are blacks on literally every continent (except maybe Antarctica). So, how is there being whites on every continent relevant?


And, it's "African-American History Month," I believe. So the fact that there are whites on other continents, just as there are blacks on other continents, is irrelevant. Why? Because it's AMERICANS. It's not very vague if it's about white Americans. It wasn't even vague before.

[LiamHerndon]

I would like to get everyones opionon on creating a White History Month.

I think we should have one, I mean Black people have Black History Month.


Why doesnt Whitey get there own History month? I think we should, I mean Blacks got there own History Month.

Why doesnt Whitey get there own college fund? Blacks got a college fund, why not whites?

Were are the good White Historical Colleges? Any advice anyone? It would be nice to go to a histrocially white college.

When will whitey get in on Affirmitive action? We have been discriminated against to. Why cant we get the afrimitive action?

All the old colleges are historically white.

[Tyriece]

Yes, if we have black history then we should have every other race month as well. Denying something to one or more races and giving it to another is the definition of racism.
Either we do have white history month, or no race should have a month at all.
And that is why Morgen freemen and myself do not celebrate black history month.

[Latinorium]

There already kind of is, if you look a this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_commemorative_months

you will see that there is irish american heritage month, jewish heritage month, and others. Also there are some that are not listed here like Italian heritage month which is October I think because of Christopher Columbus.

[Nazis in Space]

There already kind of is, if you look a this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_commemorative_months

you will see that there is irish american heritage month, jewish heritage month, and others. Also there are some that are not listed here like Italian heritage month which is October I think because of Christopher Columbus.

Ah, but they're white sub-ethnicities, and thus their months are perfectly acceptable.

It's when people with skin as black as their souls demand recognition that the white race must unite and prevent their intrusion in the glorious history of the very, very white planet earth.

We must not let Autherine Lucy repeat itself!

[Occupied Deutschland]

There already kind of is, if you look a this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_commemorative_months

you will see that there is irish american heritage month, jewish heritage month, and others. Also there are some that are not listed here like Italian heritage month which is October I think because of Christopher Columbus.

Irish-American Heritage month is in March?
Fuckin' weak. March is already consumed with 'pre-' 'during' and 'post' Saint Patrick's Day Irish Heritage celebrations, this is quite clearly an attempt to shrug off Irish contributions and racist in the extreme.

I demand a different month!

[Mkuki]

This sounds pretty stupid.

[The USOT]

Yes, if we have black history then we should have every other race month as well. Denying something to one or more races and giving it to another is the definition of racism.
Either we do have white history month, or no race should have a month at all.
And that is why Morgen freemen and myself do not celebrate black history month.

There is an important difference though. I know what Morgan Freeman means when he says that racism will stop if we stop making a deal about it, but he isnt quite right.

One downside of much of the European domination of the planet is that the history of non white peoples is often discounted as not important or simply unknown.
Much of our history classes in various countries is dominated by the events surrounding white men and white culture and when it does involve other peoples usually is summarised by "what we did to them" ignoring that they too were participants.
And in doing so, we are all poorer for it. Failing to understand the various views of history has led us to a path where children dont question that the Persians were the bad guys in films like 300. It gives rise to the ideas of white nationalists that we were a "superior race" who invented everything worthwhile instead of the cross cultural exchange of ideas that occured. Furthermore it contributes to the idea that the rest of the world is this strange foreign place rather than the truth of our joint global heritage.

The history part is a big part of black history month. We need events to bring to the public eye that black people had a part in history, because much of the world does not act like they did.

[Warda]

I would like to get everyones opionon on creating a White History Month.

I think we should have one, I mean Black people have Black History Month.


Why doesnt Whitey get there own History month? I think we should, I mean Blacks got there own History Month.

Why doesnt Whitey get there own college fund? Blacks got a college fund, why not whites?

Were are the good White Historical Colleges? Any advice anyone? It would be nice to go to a histrocially white college.

When will whitey get in on Affirmitive action? We have been discriminated against to. Why cant we get the afrimitive action?

All the old colleges are historically white.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_al-Karaouine
Except you know like the first one.

[Tyriece]

Yes, if we have black history then we should have every other race month as well. Denying something to one or more races and giving it to another is the definition of racism.
Either we do have white history month, or no race should have a month at all.
And that is why Morgen freemen and myself do not celebrate black history month.

There is an important difference though. I know what Morgan Freeman means when he says that racism will stop if we stop making a deal about it, but he isnt quite right.

One downside of much of the European domination of the planet is that the history of non white peoples is often discounted as not important or simply unknown.
Much of our history classes in various countries is dominated by the events surrounding white men and white culture and when it does involve other peoples usually is summarised by "what we did to them" ignoring that they too were participants.
And in doing so, we are all poorer for it. Failing to understand the various views of history has led us to a path where children dont question that the Persians were the bad guys in films like 300. It gives rise to the ideas of white nationalists that we were a "superior race" who invented everything worthwhile instead of the cross cultural exchange of ideas that occured. Furthermore it contributes to the idea that the rest of the world is this strange foreign place rather than the truth of our joint global heritage.

The history part is a big part of black history month. We need events to bring to the public eye that black people had a part in history, because much of the world does not act like they did.

In all honesty, I really do not care for black or white history month. I think the idea has good intentions but is rather stupid in practice. I am just saying what is fair.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

There is an important difference though. I know what Morgan Freeman means when he says that racism will stop if we stop making a deal about it, but he isnt quite right.

One downside of much of the European domination of the planet is that the history of non white peoples is often discounted as not important or simply unknown.
Much of our history classes in various countries is dominated by the events surrounding white men and white culture and when it does involve other peoples usually is summarised by "what we did to them" ignoring that they too were participants.
And in doing so, we are all poorer for it. Failing to understand the various views of history has led us to a path where children dont question that the Persians were the bad guys in films like 300. It gives rise to the ideas of white nationalists that we were a "superior race" who invented everything worthwhile instead of the cross cultural exchange of ideas that occured. Furthermore it contributes to the idea that the rest of the world is this strange foreign place rather than the truth of our joint global heritage.

The history part is a big part of black history month. We need events to bring to the public eye that black people had a part in history, because much of the world does not act like they did.

In all honesty, I really do not care for black or white history month. I think the idea has good intentions but is rather stupid in practice. I am just saying what is fair.

In reference to the points made by The USOT, though, how is it not fair to have such a month, specifically as the time period is set aside to specifically address unfairness and injustice?

[Tyriece]

In all honesty, I really do not care for black or white history month. I think the idea has good intentions but is rather stupid in practice. I am just saying what is fair.

In reference to the points made by The USOT, though, how is it not fair to have such a month, specifically as the time period is set aside to specifically address unfairness and injustice?

Well are we still living in that time period?

[The USOT]

There is an important difference though. I know what Morgan Freeman means when he says that racism will stop if we stop making a deal about it, but he isnt quite right.

One downside of much of the European domination of the planet is that the history of non white peoples is often discounted as not important or simply unknown.
Much of our history classes in various countries is dominated by the events surrounding white men and white culture and when it does involve other peoples usually is summarised by "what we did to them" ignoring that they too were participants.
And in doing so, we are all poorer for it. Failing to understand the various views of history has led us to a path where children dont question that the Persians were the bad guys in films like 300. It gives rise to the ideas of white nationalists that we were a "superior race" who invented everything worthwhile instead of the cross cultural exchange of ideas that occured. Furthermore it contributes to the idea that the rest of the world is this strange foreign place rather than the truth of our joint global heritage.

The history part is a big part of black history month. We need events to bring to the public eye that black people had a part in history, because much of the world does not act like they did.

In all honesty, I really do not care for black or white history month. I think the idea has good intentions but is rather stupid in practice. I am just saying what is fair.

...So you are not going to adress the points I just made? Your just here on a debate forum to give an oppinion and then not care for other peoples points in opposition to your own? If so that is incredibly rude.

[The USOT]

In reference to the points made by The USOT, though, how is it not fair to have such a month, specifically as the time period is set aside to specifically address unfairness and injustice?

Well are we still living in that time period?

Did you even read my post?
That "time period" is now genius. You would know that if you read my post... Black history month is here to adress problems now.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

In reference to the points made by The USOT, though, how is it not fair to have such a month, specifically as the time period is set aside to specifically address unfairness and injustice?

Well are we still living in that time period?

A time period in which we are still teaching a Eurocentric view of history in American schools?

Yes.

Nearly the entirety of the contributions of black people to the history of the United States in most high school history textbooks can be summed up as "Slavery, reconstruction, Jim Crow, Martin Luther King, Jr.", with a nod towards Harriet Tubman and George Washington Carver.

[Vetalia]

I guess I don't get the point of White History Month; we comprise a diverse set of cultures with our own rich histories and traditions. For example, I'm Polish and German...my ancestors don't have anything directly in common with, say, an English or French person aside from skin tone. I guess there could be a European History Month commemorating the influence various European cultures had on the development of the United States but that's about it. Really, it'd be like creating an Indian History Month lumping all Native Americans in to one group despite their substantial cultural differences.

The concept of Black as a cultural identity is a product of slavery and racism; the African cultures the slaves came from were destroyed by the slaveholders who sought to eradicate such identities in order to produce a more compliant servile population. They in turn formed a new culture based upon their mutual condition, losing those former cultural ties in a pretty short time. Similarly, the racism against blacks in the 19th and 20th centuries led them to form a similar bond based upon mutual experience and the need to form communities to protect themselves, hence the creation of Black as a cultural identity rather than one based upon various ethnic and cultural backgrounds. Had slavery never happened, there would be no basis for a Black History Month.