What do Frank Hargrove, George Allen & Virgil Goode all have in common?
Jan. 16th, 2007 @ 05:26 pm
:Hargrove tells Virginia blacks to 'Get over' slavery"
. RICHMOND, Va. -- A state legislator's statement that black people "should get over" slavery and questioning whether Jews should apologize "for killing Christ" caused furious and tearful denunciations Tuesday before stunned lawmakers.
Del. Frank D. Hargrove, in defending himself, told one of his critics, a delegate whose Jewish ancestors immigrated from Nazi-occupied Poland, that "your skin is a little too thin."
Current Mood: disgusted
Current Music: The White Stripes - The Union Forever
Sounds like he's an idiot I mean if he is worried about P.C. that is one thing but his job should involve some diplomacy and class as he is representing us. I don't see why this is remotely controversial. No one is interested in returing slavery. There should be a "no trolling" rule in politics like there is in most LJ communities these days, wouldn't it be nice?
I suppose at some point I'll compile a book of Virginia delegates so I can begin to keep them all straight. Wikipedia is fantastic. :)
Silly democracy - you get delegates who agree with most of their constituents.
Granted, I hate it when they cut off the quotes, "your skin is a little too thin for a decent lampshade".
Oh, I have no doubt that he's a product of the area he represents. I'm not saying he isn't. And sadly, I'm not surprised.
|Date:||January 17th, 2007 08:02 pm (UTC)|| |
Del. Hargrove's Comment
I'm not sure that Del. Hargrove, or anybody else, could have framed his comment more diplomatically. I, too, am tired of hearing Blacks cry "racist" when disagreed with and certainly don't want to hear about something that happened to them before this nation was born, let alone me. I don't support slavery nor do I support hiding behind it.
|Date:||January 17th, 2007 09:48 pm (UTC)|| |
Re: Del. Hargrove's Comment
|Date:||January 18th, 2007 07:16 am (UTC)|| |
Re: Del. Hargrove's Comment
'before this nation was born'?
Last time I looked, slavery was rendered illegal in the late 1800s, which is well after July 4, 1776 and well after the Constitution was signed by the founders. This is, unless you're talking about the CSA, which was rendered moot then and remains only as a fantasy nationality today.
I sincerely doubt that the slaves originally brought over before the U.S. formed were long-lived enough that they, and not their children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren, were the ones 'freed' by the Emancipation Proclamation.
Nations and cultures are built on their history; wounds take a long time to heal. Should we also handwave what was done to the native inhabitants some more, just because whitebread corporations want to rape their land some more? Or forget Manzanar and what we, collectively, did to a group of our own people just because of their
parents and grandparents? I keep wondering when WE are going to learn.
|Date:||January 18th, 2007 08:02 am (UTC)|| |
Thank Goodness for You!!
You are completely correct. Last I checked 1865 wasn't altogether that long ago (not if people in their fifties can remember a great-grandparent
who was a slave, and/or a grandparent
who was a sharecropper [a direct descendent for blacks - in terms of occupation - "out of" slavery]). Not only is the memory not altogether dead and buried irretrievably in the past, but, like you said, "nations and cultures are built on their histories."
As far as I can see, this apology is, at least
, an acknowledgement of what slavery very palpably contributed to as far as building Virginia/the nation to where it is today. That, to the not-too-distant relatives of the people who saw more punishment, and definitely no rewards, for any of it. I and my mind thank you for adding a bit of sanity to this thread ;_;... I was truly just fucking speechless for a long while...
-- Zahdi posted just a sentence below.
|Date:||March 27th, 2007 03:33 am (UTC)|| |
Re: Del. Hargrove's Comment
An appology on the 400th aniversory of the state's founding is more public diplomacy, it costs us nothing to be nice and we have lots to gain.
No one I know feels remotely responcible for slavery, it's just if we don't have public civility we just continue on with unpleasentness. Its just time to move on. Most of the people I know don't even have a memory of segregation. Lets face it, times change. If this helps, lets roll out the state theatre! We're doing that already with the 400th anniversery, lets do get all the stuff on the table and get over it. It's symbolic anyway. It'll mean a lot to old people.
|Date:||January 17th, 2007 09:46 pm (UTC)|| |
I agree 100% with Del Frank Hargrove, Its time to get over it.An apology to descendants will prove nothing. My grandfather came here in the early 1900's. He was treated very bad being from Italy he was looked down on spit at and had to take jobs nobody else wanted.He chose to do this to stay in this country.Yes he had a choice he was not a slave.But to apologize to me would not begin to heal the hurt and unjust treatment that was inflicted on him.Its time people learned to accept things as they are and move on.If you keep harping on things of the past you can never heal To expect an apology from the state is absurd.The people of today didn't do it.You can not apologize for somebody else's actions. Thank you all and lets get along now
|Date:||January 18th, 2007 07:23 am (UTC)|| |
It's called 'courtesy' and 'compassion' to apologise.
To expect that in the Bush Era is, truly, absurd, since our government has no concept of either of those virtues.
|Date:||March 27th, 2007 03:57 am (UTC)|| |
So a lot of immigrants were treated badly, a lot died too, in the 1900's it was factories and poor sanitation, earlier it was the bloody wilderness. The ambiguity of how people in harsh situations and recently aquired wealth treated immigrants is shown someways in how we treat mexican's today as they are illegal thus can be a burden on society at times as they are typically also poor. That just seems to be the national "self-sufficent" bias, which gets confused with ethnicity as people profile based on who is likely to negatively effect their share of services.
I don't entirely get why people whose ancesters came over poor think they have a monopoly on the american experiance. They are just people who moved here and not a lot more speacial then any other groups. I mean good grief my ancestors fought in both the revolutionary and civil war (for Illinois). They came over during the colonies and set out with the frontier spirit and literally participated in forming the country. I don't understand why either of our ancestry is relevent to the current politics. It just is a source of trivia and personal history but it doesn't mean either of us are more worthy. There is no particular sainthood in having poor ancestors or middle class ancestors and it's not an excuse for nastiness today.
Besides, perhaps having an inflow of large chunks of ethnic groups who were pretty poor, living in slums, probably drunk and perhaps violent were possibly burdening the people around them. The Finnish immigrants who also came over around that time never got as bad of a welcome because they didn't overwhelm the population already present. They worked within the system instead of trying to replace it. My great grandfather from Finland married an indentured servant, also from Finland, and was apparently very proud to renounce his allegiance to the Czar of Russia and become a naturalized United States Citizen. There are a lot of different experiances and interpretations of history. Why are you speaking for all of us?
|Date:||January 17th, 2007 11:15 pm (UTC)|| |