Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As to your point, I never said or even remotely implied the opposite of what you're stating, so you can stop being so defensive. I only specifically mentioned White Southerners because Henry Grady was a White Southerner and the concept of "New South" deals with....well....the South.
LOL I'm not being defensive - I'm discussing the topic in an interactive manner. It's "what we do" around here.
And you didn't just "mention" white southerners. You made a claim that most white southerners in the late 19th century believed in white supremacy. You have yet to give an objective source for that statement.
I do agree with you on one thing (I think), and it's that the discussion of racism isn't inappropriate when discussing the concept of the New South. Nor would it be inappropriate in a discussion about the Iron Belt states or New England or any other region of the US. One of the greatest success stories in our nation's history involves the dismantling of slavery in the south and the northeastern states' involvement in the slave trade, as well as the Civil Rights movement. Both success stories involved much sacrifice and heartache across the parties involved, and the ramifications of both slavery AND the civil rights movement are still being felt across our nation, but I think we've made great strides in the right direction and I pray we continue.
Kathryn let's be reasonable. I'm sure Mutiny isn't implying that most 19th century white southerners were going out of their way to harm and mistreat blacks. But one does not have to be a historian to establish that the general attitudes towards blacks in those days were less than progressive. Even in 2014 blacks are still fighting to overcome stereotypes, so it doesn't take a genius to figure out that things were much worse 200 years ago.
Racism certainly isn't unique to the south. But the south has practiced oppression on levels that have not been seen anywhere else in this nation. You cannot deny that fact.
I love the south too but it is in spite of the backwards ideals that exist there.
Kathryn let's be reasonable. I'm sure Mutiny isn't implying that most 19th century white southerners were going out of their way to harm and mistreat blacks. But one does not have to be a historian to establish that the general attitudes towards blacks in those days were less than progressive. Even in 2014 blacks are still fighting to overcome stereotypes, so it doesn't take a genius to figure out that things were much worse 200 years ago.
Racism certainly isn't unique to the south. But the south has practiced oppression on levels that have not been seen anywhere else in this nation. You cannot deny that fact.
I love the south too but it is in spite of the backwards ideals that exist there.
LOL I am a reasonable person.
I'm going by what Mutiny clearly stated - I'm not trying to read his mind or figure out if he's trying to send subliminal messages. What he SAID was that most white southerners in the late 19th century (not 200 years ago) held white supremacist beliefs - and I answered that with the information that in the late 19th century, many Europeans and white people all over the US (not just the South) held some pretty despicable beliefs about race - beliefs that often hinged on white supremacist beliefs, and which culminated in the horrific saga of the Holocaust, but which had their roots in Europe.
I never denied that racism existed or exists in the South. However, as a southerner and as the mother of biracial kids, and multiracial grandkids, and the sister to an adopted biracial brother, and grandmother to a Korean grandson and mother in law to a Korean daughter in law, as well as a Hispanic son in law, and as a member of a family that has lived all over the world, I don't find the racism in the American South any more extreme or remarkable than frankly, any where else in the world. In fact, here in Texas, as a white woman, I am actually a minority. I live in East Texas and we have a dynamic mix of black, white and Hispanic and believe it or not, we all get along pretty darn well together.
Of course the attitudes toward blacks in the days of slavery were less than progressive - and my point was that that attitude was NOT limited to the American South. My gosh, some of the biggest ports of entry for the slave trade were in the northeast. Some of the most wealthy slave traders were from Africa, the northeast, Europe and South America.
But my point was never about the attitudes of White Southerners relative to other American Whites and Europeans during that time period!! You're arguing with me over something I NEVER SAID OR EVEN IMPLIED!! Again, I specifically made mention of White Southerners in reference to a point about Grady, a White Southerner, and the New South. You have read something into my statement that is WHOLLY absent!!
I don't know how I can even explain it any more clearly. I'm done.
[quote=Mutiny77;362288Atlanta, while by no means perfect, decided to avoid much of that publicized conflict because it was deemed bad for business--hence the nickname "The City too Busy to Hate."[/QUOTE]
False image though. Martin Luther King sought to dramatize the fact that Atlanta was behind almost every major southern city in it's progress towards desegregation. He was killed a few months later. Bad for business, it was suppressed by the Atlanta media, as was the fact that in 2000, Atlanta was the 2nd most segregated city in America. The census figures of that year revealed that Atlanta's 85.9 black/white dissimilarity index was 2nd only to Chicago's 87.9. So the capital of the " New South " was it' most segregated.
False image though. Martin Luther King sought to dramatize the fact that Atlanta was behind almost every major southern city in it's progress towards desegregation. He was killed a few months later. Bad for business, it was suppressed by the Atlanta media, as was the fact that in 2000, Atlanta was the 2nd most segregated city in America. The census figures of that year revealed that Atlanta's 85.9 black/white dissimilarity index was 2nd only to Chicago's 87.9. So the capital of the " New South " was it' most segregated.
I think you completely skipped over the "while by no means perfect" part. The city had its issues for sure, but integration was implemented relatively peacefully, both White and Black civic leaders worked together in the aftermath of MLK's assassination to ensure there were no riots in the city, and it elected the South's first Black mayor. And the interesting thing about segregation in metro Atlanta is that, unlike in the vast majority of other Southern metros, there are several predominantly Black middle to upper-middle class enclaves here that contribute to the phenomenon.
But my point was never about the attitudes of White Southerners relative to other American Whites and Europeans during that time period!! You're arguing with me over something I NEVER SAID OR EVEN IMPLIED!! Again, I specifically made mention of White Southerners in reference to a point about Grady, a White Southerner, and the New South. You have read something into my statement that is WHOLLY absent!!
I don't know how I can even explain it any more clearly. I'm done.
I don't know how I can explain more clearly that I was expounding on the subject of racism in the late 19th century. Which is pertinent to the subject of Grady AND the New South.
I don't know how I can explain that I was expounding on the subject of racism in the late 19th century. Which is pertinent to the subject of Grady AND the New South.
The racist views of White Northerners and Europeans don't have diddly squat to do with this subject, but since you only seem to want to hear yourself talk, or see yourself type in this case, keep arguing with a brick wall. Just stop quoting my statements when you do because they don't have a THING to do with the point you're arguing. I think you're an otherwise reasonable person, so I'm completely dumbfounded as to why you persist in being so intentionally obtuse here.
The racist views of White Northerners and Europeans don't have diddly squat to do with this subject, but since you only seem to want to hear yourself talk, or see yourself type in this case, keep arguing with a brick wall. Just stop quoting my statements when you do because they don't have a THING to do with the point you're arguing. I think you're an otherwise reasonable person, so I'm completely dumbfounded as to why you persist in being so intentionally obtuse here.
I thought you said you were done with this argument. Apparently you changed your mind.
Racism in the south was not an isolated incident, nor was it disconnected from racism in western society in GENERAL - and not only that, it was SUPPORTED by popular Western beliefs and ideas of the time (late 19th century in particular, since that's the time frame we are apparently still discussing). I believe in putting issues in perspective, we can flesh out the picture of what was going on historically and that is pertinent to the discussion in my opinion.
But since you don't agree, please feel free to quit discussing it. Please note, however, that just because you don't see the connection doesn't mean it's not there or that others can't or shouldn't discuss their opinion on it, including responding to your posts - and even quoting your posts.
One reason I believe it is pertinent is that the demise of slavery, as well as the lessening of racism and supremacist views in the south (the "New South" in fact) paralled changes in attitudes toward race, a move toward tolerance by Western societies (brought about in part by the abolitionist movement, the horrors of the American Civil War, and the genocides in Europe in the 20th century) across the American and European landscape. This makes the intolerance of "third world" countries and some regimes even more horrific from our Western perspective. We've come a long way - and the New South has come along with the rest of Western society. That's one attribute that MAKES it the New South.
"Insults are the arguments of those in the wrong." When you find yourself resorting to personal attacks rather than sticking with the topic at hand, that's usually an indication that you've run out of valid points.
The New South is basically any metropolitan area in the South which has a major influx of transplants, especially Yankees, and has endless suburban sprawl, heavy traffic, cheap tract housing and lack of culture and history. Charlotte, Raleigh, Atlanta, Dallas and Houston come to mind.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Which is pertinent to the subject of Grady AND the New South.