The Wright Brothers - just "Dead White Males"?

[chequita guevara]

So, Cal, you're saying it's acceptable to make up lies to make a point? I mean, if it's such a problem, he ought to be able to come up with some real, citable examples, right? This article is a classic strawman. He sets up a fake problem, then knocks it down. Because you're predisposed to believe that white folks are persecuting themselves (since we have the vast majority of power in the society, we must be the ones doing the persecuting), you just fell for the article without you BS detectors going off.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
So, Cal, you're saying it's acceptable to make up lies to make a point? I mean, if it's such a problem, he ought to be able to come up with some real, citable examples, right?

So you think there is no such thing as people who are so committed to diversity that they would distort history to suit their purposes? Or you don't think any of them are in positions of power?

This article is a classic strawman. He sets up a fake problem, then knocks it down. Because you're predisposed to believe that white folks are persecuting themselves (since we have the vast majority of power in the society, we must be the ones doing the persecuting), you just fell for the article without you BS detectors going off.

My BS detectors would have went off if he was claiming this to be a massive conspiracy, but he isn't. He is simply pointing out that we should we wary of those who become over-zealous about pushing diversity.

[Japher]

What is a "late-talker"?

Cali is making a good point. I remember when they wanted to make a statue of the 3 fireman holding up the American flag at ground zero during 9-11, and some one wanted to make the fireman of all nationalities. This, in a way, attempts to strip the recognition of the actuall people who did this; it is not to say that all nationalities didn't help out, only that they wish to ignore FACT over DIVERSITY.

The Wright brothers white? - right.

Jesus white? - Hmmm... have we done the same thing before, and how many times. What, in all reality, does it matter what color someone is? To deny the facts, however, is not the job of a historian.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Japher
What is a "late-talker"?

Cali is making a good point. I remember when they wanted to make a statue of the 3 fireman holding up the American flag at ground zero during 9-11, and some one wanted to make the fireman of all nationalities. This, in a way, attempts to strip the recognition of the actuall people who did this; it is not to say that all nationalities didn't help out, only that they wish to ignore FACT over DIVERSITY.

Yet another great lie. What conservative liars conveniently liked to omit was that the picture was only loosely the model for the statue, and none of the men in the picture were being depicted in the statue. The sculptor used professional models. But like in Cali's article, the truth shouldn't be allowed to stand in the way of the conservative agenda.

Cali, I and others are making a very simple, but pertinent point. If the denegration of "dead, white men," is such a problem, they should be able to point to a real, citeable example, even one example. He points to none. He makes up a lie and uses it to proove his point. If you have to make up lies to support your point, then maybe your point has no basis in reality.

[Imran Siddiqui]

What conservative liars conveniently liked to moit was that the picture was only loosely the model for the statue, and none of the men in the picture were being depicted in the statue. The sculptor used professional models. But like in Cali's article, the truth shouldn't be allowed to stand in the way of the conservative agenda.

Conservative liars Yes, loosely based, but looked almost EXACTLY like the picture of the 3 firefighters. And yes, the point is that none of the men in the picture were being depicted in the statute... probably because they were all white.

[Japher]

What if I make a statue of Hitler, and make him black?

What if I make a statue of MLK, Jr., but make him white?

The point is, I would be attacked, but the reverse is TOTALLY acceptable?

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Caligastia
It seems obvious to me that the author is talking about those who are fanatical about pushing the concept of diversity, and will distort history to push their agenda.

Of course he is, but he's citing a non-issue in support of it. Where he makes any connection between the Wrights and this thesis is beyond me--he makes no effort whatsoever to show ANY instance in which people are denigrating the Wrights for such purposes. It's a whole lot of speciousness. It doesn't help his proposition to make up things that aren't there.

I find this funny:

"Had either of them been a woman, or black or any of a number of other specially singled out groups, this hundredth anniversary of their flight would be a national holiday with an orgy of parades and speeches across the length and breadth of the country."

Name me one inventor, minority or otherwise, who has a national holiday and gets parades and speeches. In fact, there is only one National holiday devoted to a minority person of any kind, MLK Jr. day. More baseless assertions from the author.

And then there's this whopper:

"But they are able to fly over it only because of those mechanics in Dayton."

Now, the author is blatantly guilty of what you're accusing others of--falsifying history to meet an agenda. As MtG pointed out, and anyone interested in accurate history knows, flight would have come with or without the Wrights. Does that mean they aren't important in the history of flight? Of course not--but they aren't gods, and the invention was being worked on the world over. They got there first (sort of), it's fine to give credit for that, but this guy is lying about how vital they were. He's doing exactly what he's complaining about.

Some of these people are in a position of power. You think this is something that should be ignored?

It's true, but plenty of people in positions of power have been doing the opposite for generations--inflating white male history above all else. Look no further than this author's erroneous hyperbole to see the proof. In an environment where we're taught Europeans are the be-all and end-all of achievement and creativity, is it such a problem that others want some credit for their achievements as well? As soon as you or guys like the author of this tripe start recognizing the distortions put into history to favor white males, I'll be happy to devote more energy to refuting those few who go to the extreme of distorting history in favor of minorities.

But I don't feel any need to address such issues based on this poor excuse for an article.

[Q Classic]

the reason why history is biased towards white males is because white males wrote most of it.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

What conservative liars conveniently liked to moit was that the picture was only loosely the model for the statue, and none of the men in the picture were being depicted in the statue. The sculptor used professional models. But like in Cali's article, the truth shouldn't be allowed to stand in the way of the conservative agenda.

Conservative liars Yes, loosely based, but looked almost EXACTLY like the picture of the 3 firefighters. And yes, the point is that none of the men in the picture were being depicted in the statute... probably because they were all white.

Actually, when compared with the picture, there were significant differences. And you still can't get around the issue of the firefighters not being in the stature, and not, as you make up, because the people in the stature weren't white (because in the scale models they were), but because the sculptor did not use the firefighters as the models. He hired professional (white) models to base the statue on.

So what we have is a statue based loosely upon an image depicting none of the people in the image, before anyone ever raised the issue of diversity. We covered all this at the time, you know. Conservatives and their selective memories. I guess it makes it easier to be nitellectually dishonest.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Cali, I and others are making a very simple, but pertinent point. If the denegration of "dead, white men," is such a problem, they should be able to point to a real, citeable example, even one example. He points to none. He makes up a lie and uses it to proove his point. If you have to make up lies to support your point, then maybe your point has no basis in reality.

The reality is that whites, just like other races, are denigrated for what they are. If you think this is a lie then you need a reality check.

[Imran Siddiqui]

because the sculptor did not use the firefighters as the models. He hired professional (white) models to base the statue on.

It is very obvious what it was depicting. It'd be like adding a few Asians and Hispanics in the Iowa Jima memorial, because it is loosely based on an image.

We covered all this at the time, you know.

Yes, and you were wrong then and you continue to be wrong now.

And that statute was wrong as well. I'm glad they never put that piece of crap up.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


Of course he is, but he's citing a non-issue in support of it. Where he makes any connection between the Wrights and this thesis is beyond me--he makes no effort whatsoever to show ANY instance in which people are denigrating the Wrights for such purposes. It's a whole lot of speciousness. It doesn't help his proposition to make up things that aren't there.

I find this funny:

"Had either of them been a woman, or black or any of a number of other specially singled out groups, this hundredth anniversary of their flight would be a national holiday with an orgy of parades and speeches across the length and breadth of the country."

Name me one inventor, minority or otherwise, who has a national holiday and gets parades and speeches. In fact, there is only one National holiday devoted to a minority person of any kind, MLK Jr. day. More baseless assertions from the author.

Obviously there's some exaggeration for the sake of humor here, but I don't think it undermines his main point.

And then there's this whopper:

"But they are able to fly over it only because of those mechanics in Dayton."

Now, the author is blatantly guilty of what you're accusing others of--falsifying history to meet an agenda. As MtG pointed out, and anyone interested in accurate history knows, flight would have come with or without the Wrights. Does that mean they aren't important in the history of flight? Of course not--but they aren't gods, and the invention was being worked on the world over. They got there first (sort of), it's fine to give credit for that, but this guy is lying about how vital they were. He's doing exactly what he's complaining about.

I think accusing him of falsifying history is going way too far, and that sentence has little to do with the main point of the article anyway. The author could easily have left it out.

It's true, but plenty of people in positions of power have been doing the opposite for generations--inflating white male history above all else. Look no further than this author's erroneous hyperbole to see the proof. In an environment where we're taught Europeans are the be-all and end-all of achievement and creativity, is it such a problem that others want some credit for their achievements as well? As soon as you or guys like the author of this tripe start recognizing the distortions put into history to favor white males, I'll be happy to devote more energy to refuting those few who go to the extreme of distorting history in favor of minorities.

But I don't feel any need to address such issues based on this poor excuse for an article.

You attack this article as if it were claiming to be an exhaustive scholarly work, when all it is is a simple op-ed piece. It is not the purpose of the article to make a highly detailed argument. The author relates some of his own experiences and gives his opinion. I guarantee you that there are plenty of examples that could be given of diversity zealots using their power to distort history, but that is beyond the scope of a tiny op-ed.

[Q Classic]

either way, white men still have it pretty good.

kinda strange, being asian-american in america. leaves me profoundly ambivalent about racial politics.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Sorry- I've not been participating for a while. I've been ignoring the Wright brothers instead.

Later tonight, I think I might ignore Thomas Edison.

[Q Classic]

who's he?