Jump to content

Mole

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    2606
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Mole

  1. It might be constructive to look at how South Africa dealt with their song problem. When the Apartheid regime fell, the old national anthem was rightly seen by many as the voice of the oppressors. At times, it was directly used as a voice of oppression. The anti-apartheid movement had adopted "Nkosi Sikelel' iAfrika" as a sort of national anthem. Under Mandela, the two songs were combined into a single national anthem, as a symbol of reconciliation. It was messy and at times ugly. It wasn't without criticism, but I would say that it's largely been a force for unity. At lot of the ugliness and redemption played out through the national rugby team. Texas athletes have a real opportunity to lead and I'm happy they're taking this opportunity.
  2. Since a troll thread has turned into a discussion of the broader culture, there is a reason to be concerned with unchecked cancel culture. Forces for good often degenerate into forces for evil, and the broader cultural strategy for achieving good (and the current movement is no doubt a force for good) is well situated to ultimately trample over innocent people. This is where we desperately need coherent conservative voices as a check. What we have now isn’t a coherent conservative voice; denying or distracting from the problems isn’t a coherent or defendable position any more. Denying the problem (or attempting to claim a position of being oppressed, as the troll OP did) isn’t engaging with it and won’t effectively check the more destructive elements of the righteous anger. The way to keep this from spiraling out of control is to acknowledge the reality of the problem (and some conservative voices have been successful at this to a certain extent) and speak positive conservative solutions. We also must all recognize that our culture has gotten race very wrong for so long that some things we find sacred might become casualties. It’s ok to mourn the loss (say the Eyes actually goes away, it’ll be a loss for many) without losing our minds or casting ourselves as an oppressed people.
  3. Here’s something that I don’t understand. Last year, I took part in a cancer research walk-a-thon. At the end, I started asking why they weren’t donating their money to heart disease research. Things got heated and I lost all of my friends. Don’t these people care about heart disease? All diseases matter.
  4. It’s win-win-win. Both sides win and the mediator wins for successfully mediating a conflict. But seriously, this is the the solution I hope they come to. Reclaim the song as a symbol of reconciliation and justice. Maybe tweak the lyrics a bit to support this - changing “upon you” to “upon us” seems like a start - and raise lots of money for some well-defined, productive causes. Maybe look at how South Africa dealt with their national anthem as well.
  5. The similarity is superficial at best. This isn’t erasing history in any respect. It’s considering the broader history, aspects of which we were probably all ignorant of, and considering if it’s reflective of our values. In fact, it’s the opposite of any of these dystopian comparisons. We are all becoming much more aware of our history, not less so. Whatever the result of this situation, this is a good thing. If the song goes away (I suspect some compromise will be found), it won’t be in negation of the wonderful memories and feeling so many have with it; it will instead be in consideration of a much fuller and more nuanced view of the history of the song. There are reasonable points of contention to work out, but dystopian comparisons aren’t reasonable.
  6. If I had to choose from the options given, I’d do away with the song as well as everything else listed. I think there’s a middle ground where the song is redeemed/kept and everyone comes away happy and better off. It only happens if the people in leadership are thoughtful and take the time to hear and understand the issue. I’m optimistic that this will be the case with the University. It looks to me like the player leadership, coaching leadership, and administrative leadership are all willing to work productively to improve things. Empowering the players to improve their world is good for everyone.
  7. Tunes can absolutely have cultural associations absent any lyrics. These can be positive, negative, racist, or completely absent of racism. Taps is the first one that comes to mind (obviously not racist, but with no doubt a strong cultural meaning). It has a very powerful impact, no lyrics needed. That impact is due to the cultural associations. Someone unaware of the cultural meaning of Taps wouldn’t be particularly moved by it. I’m sure mocking performance of Taps would be offensive to many. The question of minstrel songs and the more palatable versions that have arisen is a tricky, nuanced one. Unilaterally scrapping that entire body of literature might take us to some strange conclusions, but some of the music might be better left to more academic settings. I agree with the posts above that the best way out of this is through redeeming the darker parts of the song’s history through a charitable campaign. Make singing this song a positive act of solidarity for a more just and fair culture. You can acknowledge the bad and turn it into something positive. You can also do it free of politics to the extent that being against racial discrimination is free from partisan politics. There’s a way to “save” the song, but the way involves facing the issue head on and acknowledging the hurt. Hand waving it away is a losing proposition at this point. Like many on here, this is a specific issue that I haven’t considered before last night, so my opinion might change as I learn more. It seems like for some black Longhorns, this has been a point of contention for a while now, so it’s worth taking the time to understand.
  8. If the Israel Phil plays the opening notes to the Prelude to Tristan, all hell breaks loose. No words, just notes. Nothing inherently anti-Semitic about that particular music, just many dark associations. And it isn’t simply his anti-semitism that has caused the ban, but the deep association with the Holocaust. Prior to WWII, his music was played by the orchestra which would become the Israel Philharmonic. It was the events of the 1930s which led to the ban, despite Wagner being long dead. It’s the extra-musical associations which are so deeply hurtful (Wagner’s status as a terrible human and anti-Semite no doubt contribute), not simply the music itself, or even the person of Wagner. For example, I’m not aware of any cultural bans on singing the hymns of Martin Luther in Israel. Luther’s writing left no doubt about his anti-Semitism, yet it’s Wagner and Strauss that cause such a response. At its heart, this is essentially what’s going on here. While there doesn’t appear to be much that’s inherently racist about the text of the Eyes (just like the Tristan chord isn’t inherently bigoted), the broader associations seem to be causing problems.
  9. Username really doesn’t check out. This situation reminds me somewhat of the Richard Wagner/Israel issue, where his music is essentially banned in the country. Personally, if song legitimately hurts a large portion of the population, I don’t see a justification to keep it, even if it carries many good memories.
  10. It’s a bit dated and uses language that would, at best, be considered racially insensitive by today’s standards, but the world would be a better place if everyone read and understood Darrell Huff’s How To Lie With Statistics.
  11. So everyone is on the same page, this interview is from 2014; it’s interesting and provocative nonetheless.
  12. This is a great paragraph from Wikipedia: Bragg is generally considered among the worst generals of the Civil War. Most of the battles in which he engaged ended in defeats. Bragg was extremely unpopular with both the men and the officers of his command, who criticized him for numerous perceived faults, including poor battlefield strategy, a quick temper, and overzealous discipline. Bragg has a generally poor reputation with historians, while some point towards the failures of Bragg's subordinates, especially Leonidas Polk, a close ally of Davis and known enemy of Bragg, as more significant factors in the many Confederate defeats at which Bragg commanded. The losses which Bragg suffered are cited as principal factors in the ultimate defeat of the Confederacy.
  13. They said they're against it, so I don't see what the problem is.
  14. The problem with creating historical heroes and “great men of history” is when they turn out to be not so great. Reconciling the greatness with the weakness can be difficult. Of course, monuments to public service in support of the institution of slavery shouldn’t be so hard to reconcile. The popular sentiment of the day makes me suspect that there will be only pockets of listless resistance to taking down these statues. The culture is radically changing right in front of us.
  15. I have a friend that works at Mount Vernon. As far as I can tell, he regularly gives presentations about the life of slaves at Mount Vernon.
  16. Don’t kid yourself, you love the surly know-it-all perspective.
  17. The thought of destroying art, even stupid and offensive art, troubles me. There’s a place for these statues that could appropriately tell the right story. That place isn’t on public grounds. Since many of these statues were put up in response to the civil rights movement (or earlier), governments have had ample time to realize the error of their ways and find a more appropriate place. I’d rather the art be preserved in a more appropriate place, but the heart wants what the heart wants. I’m not going to lose much sleep over what’s happening. I think there is a public place for memorials to fallen Confederate soldiers (as opposed to statues to Confederate heroes). Given the understandable passions of the day, statue removal will be somewhat arbitrary.
  18. I think it’s great that he’s doing the right thing, whatever the reason. It seems like a win, win, win solution. The players are supported in expressing themselves, hopefully the broader culture is improved, and this has to be good for the long term success of the program - even the Eagles thing. Surely this level of support will sell well in recruiting. I know that isn’t the point, but it seems like a good bonus.
  19. I’m on team fewer corporate statements on the latest global crisis. I really don’t need to know Exxon/Mobile’s public stance on COVID, police brutality, or June’s sharknado outbreak. It makes sense if they really step in it (the NFL) or if the current crisis is a particular focus (Sea World when the sharknadoes hit). I can also get behind cultural institutions such as schools and churches making statements as long as it’s just an opening to a more in-depth public conversation. I don’t see why GlaxoSmithKline needs to opine on race relations.
  20. The guy had a pocket trumpet on the street, he wasn’t directing the latest Michael Bay Lincoln Project video. I’m not sure what he was supposed to do. I guess he could have brought his laptop and a pirated copy of Final Cut Pro to the protest, but he had a song in his heart. And humor is a really great way to confront uncomfortable truths. For the cops, that truth is that maybe they aren’t the heroes of the story; maybe they’re the villains. For those of us somewhat removed from the conflict, that’s a tough thing to come to terms with, despite all the video evidence. I see the violence in videos, but I still see the cops in my community as the good guys. My brain and my heart are in conflict. I can’t imagine how difficult it must be for any cop to come to terms with the possibility that they are the villain. The mocking call of the Empire communicates this concept efficiently (no words needed), memorably, and in a more digestible way. It’s really amazing how much was communicated with a few wobbly notes from a movie tune. People should yell and scream in anger, since there’s a really valid reason to be angry; they should march, write their representatives, and vote, since this is how change happens; they should challenge attitudes and assumptions, since the problem is cultural as well; but they should also mock and satirize, since evil is otherwise so difficult to grasp, especially when the evil is in us.
  21. Ah, thanks. Not colorblind, just plain blind.
  22. I’m not colorblind. There’s no orange here.
  23. I assume this poll doesn’t count voting in the R primary against the trumpiest candidate.
×
×
  • Create New...