• lugal@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    3 months ago

    “Fun fact”: Mount Rushmore or Six Grandfathers was a sacred mountain for the Lakota to actively disrespect their beliefs

  • Thepotholeman@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    3 months ago

    I mean sure, the ruling men of more then a century ago by our standards were terrible people. But goddamn teddy Roosevelt was a man fighting for shit you’re still fighting for today and hell he got you closer to it then compared to you now… You can lump him in with slave owners and child rapists FFS.

  • remotelove@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    The history of Washingtons teeth is uncertain. The evidence that those were slave teeth seems to show that the teeth were purchased.

    Internet pictures with words are fucking dumb.

    • Spectre@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Washington owned slaves. He was not some moral high ground individual. The only reason why they even got independence from Britain was that Britain wanted to stop the expansion of the territory and the people in the colonies wanted to continue it and kill all the natives.

      Edit:

      In 1784, Washington paid unnamed “Negroes” for nine teeth. We don’t know the precise circumstances, says Van Horn: “The president’s decision to pay his slaves for their teeth may have been a recognition on his part that teeth were something sacrosanct and personal.” On the other hand, being enslaved meant that any economic exchange was inherently not fair.

      He literally took advantage of enslaved people to get their teeth and you consider it as just “bought”. Top tier cracker mindset. I guess that to you it was also fair for him to own his slaves because he “bought” them.

      https://daily.jstor.org/were-george-washingtons-teeth-taken-from-enslaved-people/

      • remotelove@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        I didn’t suggest anything about his character, and we could probably have an entirely separate discussion about imperialism.

        What is important is how you source information when it comes to dental prosthetics.

        • Spectre@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Oh please, criticizing the meme because “the teeth were bought” Is an attempt to save his caharacter. And then saying that images with words are all dumb. People can see through your attempt of white washing.

          • remotelove@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            I don’t give a fuck about his character.

            You are making assumptions about my intent or what I believe, which is a childish argument tactic.

            Again, internet pictures with words are fucking dumb. You might get a ton of likes on Facebook with that shit though.

            • Spectre@lemmy.mlOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              Go on a seethe, cope calling me childish or whatever your manipulation tactic is, but your attempt of white washing is obvious. I am done talking to you.

              • hime0321@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                I only see one person coping and seething. Dude has criticism about a meme because the source is questionable and you just bitch and moan. You literally put word in their mouth.

                • Spectre@lemmy.mlOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Lmao, “questionable source”, you can literally Google that in 5 seconds and see all the sources that confirm that. Now I know that memes are supposed to have sources when the users can easily Google it themselves /s. The white washing apologist just get funnier and funnier.

  • rational_lib@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    Teddy Roosevelt never said “The only good indian is a dead indian.” That quote is typically associated with Philip Sheridan.

    A number of sources claim a similar quote (“I don’t go so far as to think that the only good Indians are the dead Indians, but I believe nine out of every 10 are…") alleged to be from an 1886 speech in New York, but this still goes against how he treated native americans generally and I can’t find the original speech so I’m a bit suspicious of this as well.

  • Randomgal@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    This is why I find it surprising when USAians say “This is not us.” When talking about Trump. No bro, it was always you, maybe you just weren’t paying attention.

  • Cano@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Lincoln also commuted the sentence of 264 other Dakotans that had to be executed the same day. If he didn’t intervene the executions would’ve been 303

    • jsomae@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      So what’s the real dirt on Lincoln? Did he snore or something? :P

        • jsomae@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          I’m not American, so I don’t really know that part of your history.

          Edit: he was assassinated for wanting to give black people citizenship is what I’m reading…?

          • Belgdore@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            You are correct. The only other thing that Lincoln is criticized for is suspending habeas corpus during the US civil war. I don’t know what the person you’re commenting on is on about. They may be a confederate sympathizer.

              • jsomae@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                Ah! I see now. When you said “it’s telling that while you can’t think of something cartoonishly evil he did off of the top of your head,” I thought you were saying I was ignorant for not being able to think of something cartoonishly evil. My bad, I’m just primed to read hostility on Lemmy I guess.

  • VeryVito@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I understand the point, but as an exercise, try to find four historical figures without glaring character defects. Eventually, I figure we’ll all be either judged or forgotten in time.

    • TacoButtPlug@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Obama bombed a wedding of civilians not to mention hid Afghanistan casualty reports, was a part of the death of half a million Iraqi casualties, was part of the Syrian hell that targeted mainly children with fatalities at 191,000 by 2014, then there was Yemen and saber rattling on Iran and full support of Israel. Carter sadly oversaw the East Timor genocide at 25% of the population or 170,000 killed.

    • acargitz@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      I dunno Barack Obama and Jimmy Carter, seem to have been personally good people. That’s two recent US presidents. Then I guess I would add some super low hanging fruit like Nelson Mandela, Frederick the Great, John II Komnenos, any of the Five Good Emperors, Cyrus the Great, Ashoka, and one could keep going.

      EDIT: To all those pestering me about how US presidents presided over criminal imperialist policies, here is my answer from down below:

      OP talked about “glaring character defects”.

      These are policy failures and state crimes, arguably attributed to the American state as a whole, and the long term US imperialist policies, rather to the singular person of the president.

      You might have noticed that I added Frederick the Great in the list, which tells you exactly what my understanding of the challenge was.

      I’m not here to defend US imperialism, don’t @ me.

    • argon@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      We only learn about the ones with defects, because they are the most interesting. Most people in history were fine.

      One historic figure who had no known defects: Alan Turing

      • stickly@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Its telling that your example is someone explicitly kept out of the public eye during his life. Basically any account of Turing is from personal friends or his professional work. He was a generally good person and great scientist that helped defeat the nazis, but he’s only celebrated by progressives for his persecution as a gay man.

        I struggle to find any major social cause he publicly championed or records of his views on controversial topics. I’d like to be wrong, but it’s easy to not have a mixed record as a private citizen. Nobody was grilling him to free slaves or asking his opinion on systemic injustice.

        Einstein is a contemporary comparable. He was a great scientist, opposed the nazis, and by most accounts a decent guy. He was even had to flee his homeland to escape persecution as a jew. Clearly lots of parallels. The main difference being he was an idol in his own day so we have way more first hand accounts.

        Turns out he was a socialist with varying views on communism, had shifting support for zionism and wrote rascist shit in his travel diaries. You could probably find a quote like Roosevelt’s and slap it on a picture of him, that doesn’t sum up his life.

        • luluu@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          I can tell you that Turing is not only celebrated because he was gay. That man is one of the fathers of computer science as we know it today. His Turin machines are the basis for a lot of theoretical computer science

          • stickly@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            Again, that is an incredible technical achievement but it’s not inherently good or bad. A ton of problems today come from the proliferation of tech, maybe we’d be better off if he studied something else. Coming from someone who studied and can professionally appreciate his work: it’s not exactly discovering lifesaving vaccines.

            He’s a relatable role model, especially for people who can are unfairly persecuted today. But that’s not the same as being a notable figure playing a role on the historical stage.

            Edit: I’m not mad about down votes, but disappointed nobody has provided any argument all.

            Is there any evidence that he tried to use his discovery to advance the wellbeing of the human race? Does his estate do any public outreach against the atrocities of the information age? I genuinely cannot find that. Even Alfred Nobel is still doing penance for inventing a new way to blow up rocks, and he’s been dead for nearly 130 years.

            Taken alone, creating the theoretical model for modern computer science is as laudable as inventing the internal combustion engine. Both are the innocuous roots that directly sprout to massive problems in our modern world. Not sure why that in particular needs celebration?

        • SLVRDRGN@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          I’m not certain many people even know he was gay. I’ve never heard of this. Interesting info tho- thanks.

          • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            Despite his contributions, he was forced to undergo chemical castration because of his sexuality, so it’s a pretty big deal.

  • doingthestuff@lemy.lol
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Just a little reminder that governments have killed more people than any other entity and it isn’t even close. You could try to point at religion - and that history is also fucked - but even if you exclude “holy wars” waged by religious government leaders, religious killing still doesn’t add up to what has been done by governments where religion wasn’t really a factor. The proletariat must not be disarmed. You might trust your current government, but give it a generation (or even an election) and things could be very different.

    • RedFrank24@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I wouldn’t call that a particularly insightful observation. Ever since humanity settled down in agricultural societies there have been governments, and with governments come a monopoly on force, so obviously governments have killed more people than anything else. Any organisation of humans is gonna have at least some threat of lethal force backing it.

      • PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        I wouldn’t call that a particularly insightful observation.

        I would even say it’s incredibly trivial. But even making such observations points to the fact that such person is somehow treating that as apparently undesirable, wanting what, going back to hunting-gathering?

  • TommySoda@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    You could look at any country in the world and find leaders that were just as bad and even worse throughout history. I think the takeaway should be that shitty people exist. Some of it is a product of the times, some of it just being awful people. Shitty people have and always will exist.

    Edit: With these downvotes it almost seems like y’all thought I was defending them. I absolutely was not defending them. :)

        • argon@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          And then they would have removed them later. Just like all the statues of Adolf Hitler, which no longer exist.

          • stickly@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Lmao what the fuck is this take? Somebody tell Egypt to start tearing down the pyramids. There are 1000s of Roman monuments still standing that celebrate specific conquests of slavers. Why are there still statues of shitty imperial colonizers all over Europe?

            You only get your blood-monuments torn down when your state is systematically destroyed.

  • BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    303 natives were convicted and sentenced to death following the Dakota War of 1862. Lincoln actually commuted the sentences of 264 of those natives, allowing the convictions to stand only for those he believed personally engaged in the murder of innocent women and children.

    Therefore, the last one is deliberately and intentionally misleading.

  • Randomgal@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    It’s easy to pick on “the levels of bad”, when you’re not the one one enslaved in a priaon, but writing behind a screen.

  • MasterBlaster@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Okay, fella - take a few breaths and relax. People are products of their times. The better ones fight for virtues and values they see as better at the time. They see an opportunity others do not and rally people around those.

    Others they don’t see and continue wi5h those norms, or they see the wrongs but don’t believe they can rally people around fixing them.

    Do not demonize people in the past who do not meet current norms. There will never be anybody who will meet those standards.

    Judge them against the standards of their peers.

    What if MLK did not support feminists? Would he now be considered scum, thus negating everything good he ever did?

    Heck, i don’t know if he had a stance on women’s rights explicitly. Maybe he didn’t. Is he evil if he didn’t?

    • taiyang@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Product of the times isn’t a great way to put it, but you can certainly make the argument that most people have shades of grey morality.

      Science can back you up, too, as I teach social psychology and when you dig in, you find that normative human nature is pretty complex but generally very supportive for in-group and mildly empathetic even with strangers. It’s only when you dehumanize a group do you get the worst behavior, and in all four cases you see that, be it slaves or indigenous people.

      When you look at those times, it’s people who recognized their humanity that ended up in the just side of history.

    • snooggums@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Do not demonize people in the past who do not meet current norms. There will never be anybody who will meet those standards.

      “Nazis were just a product of their time!”

      • MasterBlaster@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        So you believe the entirety of the United States’ existence is an affront to humanity as it’s very foundation is as evil as Nazism, right? Nothing America ever stood for was any better rhan thw worst of humanity.

        It is telling that you can so lightly equate my comment to waving off Nazism as if across the developed world Nazism was the norm of the time. Yes, most peoples in the European culture were naturally Nazis, and only a few morally sound people were against it. I see your troll… And I set your straw man on fire.

        • Horse {they/them}@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          So you believe the entirety of the United States’ existence is an affront to humanity as it’s very foundation is as evil as Nazism, right?

          considering that

          1. it was founded on genocide
          2. it was built by slavery
          3. it still has not completely outlawed slavery
          4. lebensraum was explicitly based on manifest destiny
          5. it has killed far more people than the nazis ever managed

          yes, the usa is an affront to humanity and is on par with the third reich

    • Dessalines@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      There were plenty of peers, even UK and European ones, that opposed the US colonial project. Read Losurdo - Liberalism, a counter-history if you want an in-depth look at the debates of the time.

    • yunxiaoli@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Okay. There were staunch abolitionists across the US and especially in the UK. Many of whom were operating on the basis of equality, i.e. not the American belief that black people are a subspecies that were sent from heaven to serve whites, like all the leaders of the US though before the 1900s.

      So by your own method, Washington was a disgusting human being, one would argue a demon.

      • MasterBlaster@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        That statement does not make any sense. You need to review the concept of ‘logic’. This is another excellent example of twisting a statement to discredit the person who said it rather than addressing the concept put forth by that person.

      • stickly@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        There are people today rightly pointing out the looting of the global South by the global North, and yet nobody in the north is volunteering to give it all back. What disgusting human beings, if they had any decency they’d give it back and ritually kill themselves

        • MasterBlaster@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          Perhaps I’m not seeing the sarcasm in this. The level of hatred one has to have for a whole population to genuinely want them all killed in disgrace reminds me of something that happened in recent history several times… hmm… what could that be? Cambodia, Serbia, Germany… hmm.

          Mighty high horse there. Got a mirror? Consider using it.

      • MasterBlaster@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        Really? You think because people existed who held our view of what is right means all who did not have an epiphany, and whole-heartedly agree, are horrible subhuman beings?

        • yunxiaoli@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          That humans are human?

          Yeah, I’m willing to draw the line in the sand there. Equality in the face of nobility (i.e. class vs race based discrimination) is more fair and equal than the view espoused by our founding fathers. But all caste systems have always been bad. Universally. And no matter the culture or time period with this idea, you’ll find a loud minority or a large majority of people that disagree with the caste system in place.

          Because that’s how they work, a minority can only benefit, and are the only ones that need it to work, so the less stratified they are the more people are against it but are rendered powerless by the system in place.

          Every human that didn’t believe in equality, and by that I just mean that all humans are human, is a bad person.

          For fucks sake orangutans got their name because we as a species treated them as human at one point. If we can do that to a fucking monkey there’s no epiphany needed to do it to actual humans.

          • MasterBlaster@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            Your prose belies your ideology, which indicates said ideology depends on defining those who don’t fulfill said ideology as sub-human. So far, most responses have been attempts to indirectly assert that the idea that people who were wrong about some things cannot possibly have been right about anything (and by the way, any who think otherwise are just as horrible).

            I am quite aware there is nothing i could possibly say to get anybody to address the actual issue i raised, never mind “win” a debate over it.

    • eldavi@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      What if MLK did not support feminists? Would he now be considered scum, thus negating everything good he ever did?

      he literally addressed the national organization for women in 1966 and espoused their ideals.

      giving a pass to the people from history is problematic because the same ideals of progressiveness that we pride ourselves on today were present in the past and people knew that it existed; they simply weren’t as popular back then as they are now and anyone espousing them back then were treated like tankies of their own time.

      giving them a pass only helps to excuse regressivism and anti-progressive sentiment like both the republicans and democrats (respectively) practice today; this is a key reason why we have trump as president today and probably jd vance tomorrow.

      • MasterBlaster@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Excellent job taking what I wrote and reframing it to make it appear i asserted something I did not.

        Reading the room, I can see this forum is filled with people who have an axe to grind and have already decided I am a “part of the problem” because I had the audacity to suggest that we should not demonize the American founders.

        Good luck finding a nation that has any redeeming qualities, given that no founders are unimpeachable for anything.

        • eldavi@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          you’re missing the point and no nation’s founder’s character is unassailable.

          we give grand canyon sized passes to these specific founders to white wash their truly horrific behaviors (that we know about); but don’t do the same thing for founders that we consider our enemies and that’s indicative of the propaganda that we keep perpetuating when we repeat this whitewashing to each other; as well as the reason why we’re descending into fascism.

          no one is immune to propaganda so, yes, you are part of the problem like i am; the only difference is that me along with most of the people commenting on this post are aware of this specific propaganda and you’re not; hopefully unwittingly so.

          • MasterBlaster@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            I find it ironic that you think I am unaware of some propaganda, presumably related to this thread.

            I learned about the imperfect personalities of our founders and their peers in elementary school. No passes were given. I also learned that many of the founders sought to explicitly outlaw slavery, but compromised in order to get unity vs. king Charles and a viable nation.

            Had they not done that, we would have been divided against an overwhelmingly powerful existential threat and probably would have lost. It is an example of making incremental progress and postponing a conflict until later so that there will be a later.

            You are missing my point. “Canceling” historical figures or rewriting history because “bad” is a disservice to everyone. Acknowledging both the good and bad is the better approach. We learn by studying history, identifying the failures and successes precisely to learn from them and hopefully do better.

            Our current president is an example of what happens when we don’t learn from history. I don’t know any reasonable person who whitewashed our founders. For those people, you need to look at movements that seek authoritarian control over a population, the people who follow them, and their victims who were denied the necessary education in history and critical thinking.

            Additionally, I think most on this thread need to brush up on logical fallacies. Even the best of us forget some of them, but it is endemic in these forums.

            • eldavi@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              your point misses THE point; nothing is being cancelled; and incrementalism only serves to perpetuate our unjust society.

              the way you describe authoritarian movements and mass genociders as “imperfect personalities” is an unironic and unaware manifestation of the our blessed homeland meme

              you advocate for critical thinking and learning from history without acknowledging that your own country is an authoritarian oligarchical regime that denies its victims the necessary education that would teach the history and critical thinking they need and it has lead the election of an openly authoritarian president who seeks control; as all presidents in the past have done; and it will lead to more.

              i don’t know what your education is like, so i don’t know what you learned in elementary school about these founder’s crimes against humanity; but if it’s anything like how most american voters’ education of these men, it’s seriously lacking on this topic.