I went to church today...

[FatAndFaithless]

Drich, for the love of your God enough with the goddamn laughing smileys.

[Drich]

It wasn't intended to be a historical reenactment of a previous march. It was not a march to recreate history. No one was dressing up as 60s protesters. It was a peaceful commemoration of march that had ended in violence.

Again see what I said above. (Read past the word re-enactment) In true rememberences both sides of the struggle are remembered. In political propaganda only one side is heard.

Veterans Day parades don't generally include people representing the opposing side because they aren't historical reenactments. This was essentially the same.

Vetrans day parades don't include members of opposing armies because opposing armies aren't quartered in this country. How ever veterans day speaches do indeed include a rememberance for those who died on both sides of a conflict.

What happened in selma was a on site rememberance as per my Auschwitz example. and when done properly they do include the opposition so the truth is perserved, and the line into propaganda is not crossed.

It's morally bankrupt to say all police officers beat black people with clubs? Really? Wrong, I'll grant you, but morally bankrupt?

ABSOLUTLY YES!!!
Why? Because To be a Police officer in the 60's assigned to protect one of the civial rights leaders was to put your self in the line of fire.
These men were heros and they are treated like villians to steal the glory of all of the actions of a few is indeed the act of a morally bankrupt person.

There is a transferance of anger from what is happening in the news today with police onto the actions of the police then.

I have never seen the Civil Rights Movement taught in such a way as to suggest either that there weren't law abiding police officers who did their jobs properly
or that there weren't white people who participated one the side of civil rights.

The move from non volient protests in the late 60's to violent protests was supposedly because of how all police handeled black protesters. The Black panters came into power on this point. How is it you missed that teaching?

But that does not change the fact that at this particular bridge peaceful marchers asking for no more than equal rights were met with officers wielding billy clubs.

How many more peaceful protests ended uneventfully?

---

Drich, for the love of your God enough with the goddamn laughing smileys.

[SteelCurtain]

Again for those who are slow to understand, the example of a war re enactment was used to underline the importance of repersenting both sides in a rememberance. That what war re enactments are. That is why I also used the proper example of the Germans and Jews both being repersented in the Auschwitz.
Again with out true repersentation of both sides, what you have ceases to be a rememberance of things past, and you replace it with propaganda.
I am not using the propaganda as a hot topic/elicite a response word. Propaganda's literal defination is based on those actions.

prop·a·gan·da
/ˌpräpəˈɡandə/
noun
noun: propaganda; noun: Propaganda
1.derogatory information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view.

If the otherside is not repersented in anyway, then you have a bias that is being used to promote a particular political point.

Again That Is Why German Involvement Is So Accuratly Portrayed In The Properly Done Auschwitz rememberance.

So, if I'm reading through all the ad hominem correctly, you are stating that without naming and remembering the men in the Alabama State Troopers who didn't beat African Americans, we aren't remembering the event correctly, and we are promoting propaganda in remembering and vilifying the state laws that required men to count the bubbles on a bar of soap, or spell non-existent words, take literacy tests which doctors and lawyers in the African American community were failing, or to travel to the state capitol in order to register to vote. We are promoting propaganda in walking over that bridge 50 years later in memorializing the men and women that made it possible to do that without fear without also memorializing the people who simply didn't beat other humans, some of whom stood by and did nothing while others did?

As far as your definition of propaganda, what in my OP was derogatory, biased, or misleading? What about this march was any of that? Again, it wasn't a re-enactment. We weren't marching in order to create a historically accurate recreation of what happened in 1965. We weren't acting anything out. Otherwise it would have been a march to Montgomery, 54 miles away. It was a celebration. It needn't represent anything more than feeling camaraderie between men and women of all stripes in a reflection of unity.

Appearently it was a different movie than what Joseph A. Califano Jr. of the Washington Post or JENNIFER SCHUESSLER of the NY Times saw as well. http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/t...story.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/t...story.html

I did not refute that, now did I? I agree that the producers of Selma overly dramatized that portion of the narrative. Maybe they shouldn't have. Probably they shouldn't have. What I refuted is that the movie was race baiting or not representing any white people who were on this side of history.

And I did not say that, did I? I simply asked where 60's police officers also repersented in that march? Because with out them King, jackson, and all the other civial rights leaders would have been strung up long before they became house hold names.

Wow. Are you saying there was a movement by a police force in the south to protect civil rights leaders without the federal government stepping in? And Jackson was beaten and shot to death by the Alabama State Troopers during a peaceful march.

You seem to be suggesting that the very act of not murdering other people is something we should be remembering people for. Give me some names we should memorialize for not lynching and we will dedicate a Wiki page for them.

:Jerkoff: you do even know what is being discussed do you? You want to argue the typical white/black crap, and I'm pointing to all the grey that 'you people' want to ignore to push white/black propaganda.
...
What I'm trying to bring attention to is the truth that propagandists seem to forget. That if not for the 'bad guys' in today's media (police and goverment officals) civial rights would remain a dream that we dare not speak of. Movies like selma tend to be more hate inspiring and segergational than educational or informitive. Then to put on a remberance march without proper repersentation of both side reaks of brain washing!

Educate your self before you speak next time. just do a simple google search before you respond in a forum, to at least see where your opponet is comming from. Otherwise you look the fool when someone like me provides legit evidence to support the unpopular thing I just said.

Drich, you are the last person on this forum who should instruct another person to educate themselves. When you are telling me to see where my "opponet is comming from" and spelling words like "goverment officals" and "civial" and "segergational" and "informitive" and "repersentation" and "reaks" all within three consecutive sentences, you cannot possibly be trying to malign my level of education. A third grader spells and forms sentences better than you. I am quite educated, and I read a lot of history. You are right that this isn't solely a black/white issue. It is a human issue.

Again, your a douche for not knowing this is not a black or white discussion. It is a discussion of the truth, and how the truth is being hidden away for black and white discussions.

If you want to pretend that racism wasn't as bad as it was or that it doesn't continue today, you just go ahead and do that. Just don't try and represent it as "truth." You are just making yourself look as dumb as you undoubtedly are.

[Jenny A]

In true rememberences both sides of the struggle are remembered. In political propaganda only one side is heard.

It was neither a museum nor a reenactment, nor yet a memorial. The march was political speech, then and now. And it was a celebration of rights gained. As such it presents the view point of those who organized and attended the event. So?

What happened in selma was a on site rememberance as per my Auschwitz example. and when done properly they do include the opposition so the truth is perserved, and the line into propaganda is not crossed.

It was what the event organizers wanted it to be. And that was not a history lesson or a historical reenactment. Though your police were inevitably represented as crowd control. Here they are behaving themselves:

I have never seen the Civil Rights Movement taught in such a way as to suggest either that there weren't law abiding police officers who did their jobs properly

---

---

or that there weren't white people who participated one the side of civil rights.

The move from non volient protests in the late 60's to violent protests was supposedly because of how all police handeled black protesters. The Black panters came into power on this point. How is it you missed that teaching?

Police behaved both well and badly at different times and places during the Civil Rights Era. They beat peaceful protesters and they protected black school children and they sometimes behaved neutrally. And yes the Black Panthers were responding to police violence. But teaching that by no means teaches that all police behaved that way. I've never been taught otherwise. However, we expect police to uphold the law. It isn't news when they do. It's news when they don't.

But that does not change the fact that at this particular bridge peaceful marchers asking for no more than equal rights were met with officers wielding billy clubs.

How many more peaceful protests ended uneventfully?

Many. But this one is historic in part because it didn't. And it is worth celebrating because it can now be done without violence.

[dyresand]

I'll donate 5 dollars to get Dirch a 2 week ban.