By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Political Correctness and History

sales2099 said:

It’s never good to erase and rewrite history. We need to learn from it not be blind to it. The Left just keep taking things up a notch. Nothing is really safe anymore.

What history was re-written? The post is about one museum removing a shrunken heads display, not re-writing history.

Also, people on the left aren't some organization. The left is a side of a political spectrum that champions equal rights, opportunities, freedoms, and socio-economic policies that benefit the majority population. It has nothing to do with re-writing history.

Last edited by Jumpin - on 21 September 2020

I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

Around the Network
sales2099 said:

It’s never good to erase and rewrite history. We need to learn from it not be blind to it. The Left just keep taking things up a notch. Nothing is really safe anymore.

A lot of the history that is being "rewritten" is actually correction of blatantly false narratives. There isn't any value in "history" that was a lie to begin with.

Case in point: Southern history following the Civil War, which was heavily whitewashed and rewritten to paint the South as heroes and victims when that wasn't the case. That version of history is called the "Lost Cause." That includes the statues are a source of controversy and have been so for at least 40 years. The only history the statues represent was the South shaking its fist defiantly at the Civil Rights movement and intimidating Blacks to "know their place." I'm fine with that crap being relegated to museums with plaques explaining the real historical context of them being constructed as anti-Civil Rights propaganda.



If you think cancel culture is bad now, you'd have hated living in the United States in the 1950s, when Congress was actually throwing people in prison for thinking the wrong way. A lot of people got their livelihoods destroyed by the House Un-American Activities Committee, and a disproportionately large number of the people destroyed were Jewish. You also wouldn't have liked the 1980s, when the Religious Right was carrying on a less harsh version of the House Un-American Activities Committee with Reagan's blessing.



Theres just no stopping it at this point. History is getting rewritten and art, speech and entertainment are being censored all the time. At least we can still criticize things...for now.



Jumpin said:
sales2099 said:

It’s never good to erase and rewrite history. We need to learn from it not be blind to it. The Left just keep taking things up a notch. Nothing is really safe anymore.

What history was re-written? The post is about one museum removing a shrunken heads display, not re-writing history.

Also, people on the left aren't some organization. The left is a side of a political spectrum that champions equal rights, opportunities, freedoms, and socio-economic policies that benefit the majority population. It has nothing to do with re-writing history.

That's the right...

The left is all like "you will be equal, or else!". While the right is like "we'll give you the chance, but you still have to want it/earn it".



Around the Network

You can't change history. Just learn from it. I don't get offended (anymore...🙄) when I see things that are a product of their time. You shouldn't force your moral beliefs on something that was totally acceptable at the time. It's insane. But, that's what we do. Even things like comedy or ten year old tweets. People get mad at something from 20 years ago and try to "cancel" someone. I can't condone that.



Twitter: @d21lewis

MrWayne said:
donathos said:

According to People (via Yahoo) a museum at Oxford described in the article as "one of the leading museums of anthropology, ethnography and archaeology in the world" is removing some of its pieces (here: "shrunken heads") from display because they "[reinforce] racist and stereotypical thinking that goes against the Museum's values today."

It's hard for me not to think of Orwell here and the "memory hole," and how far are we really from these sorts of things being taken out of textbooks, too, to protect students against such stereotypical thinking? This seems to me to be a dangerous thing to do, hiding true things from our history in order to get people to believe the things we deem proper for them. Paternalistic at best, totalitarian at worst.

I get that not many people care about "truth" anymore. The President of the US sure as hell does not. But to see institutions like Oxford show such contempt for it is still bracing. This is the kind of thing that people on the left always said would never happen; and if this is where "political correctness" leads, then we're right to reject it. People should be told the truth, shown the truth, especially by a bloody museum of all places, and then be allowed to come to their own conclusions.

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/oxford-museum-removes-controversial-shrunken-153744959.html

I wonder if you read the article you posted as your source because they clearly state why they will remove the shrunken heads and other pieces from the next exhibition.

Spoiler!
It has nothing to do with "Political Correctness"

They remove these pieces from the next exhibition (btw it's completely normal that museums remove and add pieces to an exhibition because they have much more exhibits than they can actually display) because they think these exhibits don't teach the visitor something about the people they are coming from but instead paint those people in a wrong picture.

So their goal is to actually present these people and cultures more accurately than in past exhibitions. Of course we will se if they achieve their goal but to judge that, we would have to a) see the new exhibition and b) be actuall experts on the topic.

So cool down and let to poor old Orwell rest for a bit, he gets used way to often nowadays.

Well... This was an awesome post. I didn't read the article, either. Just jumped to a conclusion based on the OP. Hell, I might have just read the thread title. I don't remember. Either way, thanks for the logical response. A lot of us may just be jumping to conclusions based on other things going on in the world today that prompt strong emotions.



Twitter: @d21lewis

MrWayne said:

I wonder if you read the article you posted as your source because they clearly state why they will remove the shrunken heads and other pieces from the next exhibition.

Spoiler!
It has nothing to do with "Political Correctness"

They remove these pieces from the next exhibition (btw it's completely normal that museums remove and add pieces to an exhibition because they have much more exhibits than they can actually display) because they think these exhibits don't teach the visitor something about the people they are coming from but instead paint those people in a wrong picture.

So their goal is to actually present these people and cultures more accurately than in past exhibitions. Of course we will se if they achieve their goal but to judge that, we would have to a) see the new exhibition and b) be actuall experts on the topic.

So cool down and let to poor old Orwell rest for a bit, he gets used way to often nowadays.

Of course I read it. Your reply is both condescending and off-base, because my source does clearly state why they will remove the shrunken heads -- and it has everything to do with "political correctness."

Yes, museums routinely remove and add pieces to their displays. That has nothing to do with the article which states that the museum "has removed 1230 human remains from its display as part of a museum-wide effort to 'decolonize' the institution" (emphasis added). That's not simply the cycling out of a few pieces, to put up a new display, to freshen up exhibits, or whatever. That's an explicitly political effort. Further, this began with "an ethical review of its artifacts" due to "the derogatory language used in the historic case labels," which I think sits comfortably with what we all understand as political correctness. (So maybe cool it with the obnoxious "spoiler tag" kind of cleverness, and maybe spend that time making sure you've understood what you've read, instead?)

The heads, "one of the museum's most popular attractions since the 1940s," are being removed to soothe the sensibilities of guests who find those remains "a testament to other cultures being ‘savage’, ‘primitive’ or ‘gruesome'," per the museum director, as quoted in the article. She goes on to say, as I'd quoted initially, that "the displays reinforced racist and stereotypical thinking that goes against the Museum’s values today." So that's the point: to combat "racist and stereotypical thinking," because people find the heads "savage," "primitive," and "gruesome," not to "actually present these people and cultures more accurately," as you have represented. (It could be that a culture is presented completely "accurately," however that is measured, and yet some people might still judge that culture as "gruesome," or whatever. That's people, you know? Always having opinions.)

Further, the museum has complete control of presentation: so if this were really about simply presenting "these people and cultures more accurately," it could always provide additional information to help visitors understand the artifacts or further contextualize them, with additional displays, pamphlets, lectures, etc. Museums do that all the time; plenty of historical artifacts are strange or upsetting to modern eyes, and require additional information or context to be properly understood. In a way, that's a museum's entire job (vis a vis display) and how they educate and inform. They are choosing instead to hide genuine artifacts from view (one of their most popular attractions, mind), because they do not like how people respond when provided with the actual evidence of earlier cultures.

Not only is it perverse for a museum to hide information from its visitors rather than provide the same (I could as easily have referenced Bradbury as Orwell; it's as backwards as his "fire department"), but it is both insulting and controlling. The visitors cannot be expected to understand what they're seeing. They cannot be allowed to reach their own conclusions.

And speaking of conclusions, how is it you (who questioned whether I'd read the article) managed to read it and present it so dishonestly? Or maybe you are simply so blinded by your political perspective (because anyone who takes aim at "political correctness" must be the enemy, I'm sure) that you cannot see this straight. But yes, when a museum begins removing artifacts from display because the people who view them form "incorrect" opinions, that's a problem. We do not employ museums to hide from us the evidence of the past, but to show it to us.



Thats funny, not even museums are safe anymore. Some art/artifacts can't even be seen on a freaking museum. Some people argued that all those racist statues that needed to be tore down by the peaceful protestors should not be destroyed but sent to a museum so people, in the correct place, could see history with the eyes of that time. Nope.
A museum should never do it to pander to the progressives, it is the best place for us to see something that is not acceptable by society anymore, in a way to preserve history and allow everyone to look at our past and learn from it. I hope other museums don't follow the same practice.
I hope we someday do not find out that Da Vinci was a racist.



I'm confused.. a museum self-selecting what they want to display so they can properly control the narrative of their own exhibits is being compared to state-sanctioned thought police?

My BS-meter is dinging on "manufactured outrage". I think some of you just want a reason to be mad.

And on the subject of PC culture, the great irony is that "hating on political correctness" is just a politically correct way of saying "I want to be disrespectful and discompassionate to people I hate without societal backlash".

I get it, sometimes public opinion can be seemingly exhausting, retrograde, or even oppressive. Try being gay. Not fun. Or for a more gaming related reference, I am clearly in the minority in regard to my negative opinions of the Final Fantasy XVI trailer. But Square Enix owns the property, and fans are seemingly on board for another action-oriented rpg. I can have opinions on how it's bad for the series and bad for gaming, but that doesn't make me right or make everyone else wrong.

The point is, you can disagree with their decisions, but it was their decision to make. That's the problem with getting upset with PC culture. In the end, it's just an example of Capitalism... Actually doing what it's supposed to.

EDIT: To clarify on a point I alluded to, but didn't explicitly state, getting vaguely upset at how public opinion changes by attacking strawmen like "PC culture" doesn't really accomplish meaningful change.  If there something you disagree with, engage in a dialogue on that specific subject.  This is why I disagree with motive of the OP here.  This is not a discussion about the heads being removed.

Last edited by IvorEvilen - on 21 September 2020