Anne,
I agree with your posting. This is a history list, and we are discussing 
historical events.  Those who continue to focus on racism have missed the 
point of the posting. I feel as if some folks want to limit the scope of 
what is discussed on this history forum. Unfortunately there are many sides 
to historical events, some good, some not so good.

In my opinion this topic has now run its course.

Anita
>From: Anne Pemberton <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history         
>      <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: The Law & Lynching
>Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 13:36:13 -0400
>
>Lyle Browning said:
>
>"Jumping into the intent of the post, there are those who appear to be
>blissfully unaware that racism exists in other venues than in the
>white world."
>
>Lyle,
>
>Perhaps you are jumping to false conclusion when you attempt to "jump into 
>the intent of the post". I cannot imagine that anyone sophisticated enough 
>to be part of this discussion would not be aware that racism, which is 
>described as the presumption that one race, usually one's own, is superior 
>to other/another race/s, does not exist in people of other races. But what 
>is the point of berating it?
>
>Certainly racism has been a factor in the public and private behaviors of 
>many white persons in Virginia. Does that mean that ALL white persons are 
>racists? Certainly not. No more than to say that all blacks are racist 
>because some join organizations which publically and privately extoll 
>racist level of price in their race.
>
>It is not necessary to incessantly point out that there were exceptions to 
>the wide-spread sense of white superiority over people of color. It is, 
>perhaps, necessary to point out the destructive results of that racism. 
>Why? If for no other reason than to keep it from rearing its ugly head 
>again.
>
>In another discussion on immigration, some posters typically point out that 
>the posters who decry immigration when it involves people of color are 
>actually racist in their objections. It is not just a black/white issue. It 
>is a matter of how tolerant each of us is. Who is it you would prefer to 
>deny rights to and why? Is it justified to deny equal rights and 
>opportunities to non-European races only?
>
>The contention raised a few days ago by a poster who assumed that the zoo 
>in DC would bar attendees who were not of African descent on this one day 
>of the year was an example in point. No reasonable person would believe 
>admission, with money in hand, would be denied. It's just that the day was 
>set aside for those of African descent to come together as they have for a 
>century in an environment pleasing to them. So what?
>
>Do people need the consent of the "majority" in order to celebrate a 
>holiday of their choosing? No, they do not. It is immaterial the source of 
>that holiday. If people choose to celebrate the day, let them do so in 
>peace and freedom.
>
>Let's stop with trying to be a "control freak". Let freedom ring!
>
>Anne
>Anne Pemberton
>[log in to unmask]
>http://www.erols.com/apembert
>http://www.educationalsynthesis.org

_________________________________________________________________
Like puzzles? Play free games & earn great prizes. Play Clink now. 
http://club.live.com/clink.aspx?icid=clink_hotmailtextlink2