I keep assuming things can't possibly get any crazier, but they do. This is, sadly, only the beginning.

Defund the Thought Police.

Foreigner wrote:They also say that the movie was one of the key factors in the creation of the post-slavery institutionalised discrimination against black people in the US, which goes as far as suggesting that the slavery movement continues today in the form of the prison system. Again they build a mostly convincing case.

Many of the cherished bedrocks of liberal think comes straight from black oppression.

Gun control was formulated by the police of New York City as a way to take guns out of the hands of blacks, so they have no means to defend themselves from lynchings, etc.

The founder of Planned Parenthood was on a mission - to get abortion on demand for blacks, so the entire race could be aborted out of existence.

All history conveniently swept under the rug because it doesn’t serve the cause of political correct think.

Just like Gone with the Wind.

History forgotten is history repeated in the future.

As for post-slavery black oppression..

Most leaders in the South believed slavery would have naturally ended in a couple of decades if the war hadn’t come along.

The civil war ended in the US without a real resolution. They couldn’t. The war pitted brother against brother, divided entire families. Executing the losing side and stamping out all traces, would have meant losing half of the family, and citizens would have never allowed it to happen. As a result, all those who lost the war joined the winners as equals. And an idea that should have died a natural death was championed even to this day.

Sorry for the long post.

tightenupvolume1 wrote: ↑Sat Jun 13, 2020 4:01 am But don't mention the war

Don't mention the episode.

clutchcargo wrote: ↑Fri Jun 12, 2020 9:02 pm

Yobbo wrote: ↑Fri Jun 12, 2020 8:37 pm

clutchcargo wrote: ↑Fri Jun 12, 2020 8:23 pm The film was shot in 1939 so frankly, I have to ask: is this an attempt to change/remove history?

History has a habit of repeating itself, specially if we can't be reminded of our mistakes!

I might have to defer to our US members for better insights on this but my take out of the movie was that the southern states had grown fat off the back of slave workers and that was the (main?) impetus for the civil war where the northern states wanted to give slaves their freedom. Hence I fail to see what the issue is with the film given the overall positive message it portrays ie that slavery was abominable and could not continue.. not withstanding the stereotypes that may be depicted.

did you see the film at all?

it portrayed the slaves as living a great happy life and the houses slaves were treated as family
totally out of proportion to the realty of things.

watch and compare it to "gone with the wind's" depiction of slavery

phuketrichard wrote: ↑Sat Jun 13, 2020 7:26 am

clutchcargo wrote: ↑Fri Jun 12, 2020 9:02 pm

Yobbo wrote: ↑Fri Jun 12, 2020 8:37 pm

clutchcargo wrote: ↑Fri Jun 12, 2020 8:23 pm The film was shot in 1939 so frankly, I have to ask: is this an attempt to change/remove history?

History has a habit of repeating itself, specially if we can't be reminded of our mistakes!

I might have to defer to our US members for better insights on this but my take out of the movie was that the southern states had grown fat off the back of slave workers and that was the (main?) impetus for the civil war where the northern states wanted to give slaves their freedom. Hence I fail to see what the issue is with the film given the overall positive message it portrays ie that slavery was abominable and could not continue.. not withstanding the stereotypes that may be depicted.

did you see the film at all?

it portrayed the slaves as living a great happy life and the houses slaves were treated as family
totally out of proportion to the realty of things.

watch and compare it to "gone with the wind's" depiction of slavery

Good point Richard.

I'll watch the video above later when I have time (it's over an hour long) but I'll nevertheless respond in the meantime.

You're right it shows the house slaves close to them as sort of happy and treated as family (dunno about great happy life tho). Now that might have been how it was for some southern plantation owners but not necessarily representative of the plight of most house slaves I would imagine. Yet they are still not free and it's still bonded labour and the film glosses over that.

The other thing is is that I imagine house slaves would have been treated quite differently to those that worked the fields with overseers. In this regard I don't recall (I haven't watched the film recently) seeing too much of the plight of the slaves toiling in the fields...maybe they conveniently left that bit out.. And when Altanta was about to fall they sent their slaves off with pitchforks to fight off the yankees in final desperation. I dunno if that part is true and the movie depicts them as willing to go. Again, probably not a totally accurate depiction.

So yeah the film gives a glorified version for the purposes of the movie which I think reflects the thinking of the audiences at that time in 1939. I'm sure most people these days would see through that and understand many many slaves were mistreated and lived abominable conditions. Think the mini series 'Roots' and even Tarentino's 'Django Unchained' to name a few.

But I standby my original point that the film imo portrays white southerners living a life of a luxury and leisure built on the labour and sweat of black slaves and that that lifestyle was not sustainable. The latter is not specifically shown but that's how I saw it reading/watching between the lines. And there were a few references in the film where it was mentioned that the world as they knew it (the south) was dying before their eyes. That's the overall positive message that I saw. That the civil war brought about/hastened the eventual freeing of slaves and stopped the slave trade.

Whatever one thinks about whether the film accurately depicts conditions of the time, I still don't get why it should be banned in an attempt to 'rewrite history' and because the stereotypes depicted there may/are not contemporary in this day and age. To my mind it is like a time capsule of the thinking and frame of mind of the producers and the public at the time and I believe that should be preserved and accepted for what it is. But I understand how some may think or feel otherwise too. It was a love story set against the backdrop of the American civil war..produced at a time just after a severe depression and as WW2 was starting.

newkidontheblock wrote: ↑Sat Jun 13, 2020 5:03 am

Foreigner wrote:They also say that the movie was one of the key factors in the creation of the post-slavery institutionalised discrimination against black people in the US, which goes as far as suggesting that the slavery movement continues today in the form of the prison system. Again they build a mostly convincing case.

Many of the cherished bedrocks of liberal think comes straight from black oppression.

Gun control was formulated by the police of New York City as a way to take guns out of the hands of blacks, so they have no means to defend themselves from lynchings, etc.

The founder of Planned Parenthood was on a mission - to get abortion on demand for blacks, so the entire race could be aborted out of existence.

All history conveniently swept under the rug because it doesn’t serve the cause of political correct think.

Sure, blacks are to blame for all the things you don't like. This site has become a hotbed of bigoted garbage, it's pathetic and you are one of the worst offenders. It's funny how most of you don't even live in Cambodia.