I heard an interesting argument from the leftist camp of thought recently, talking about the idea of 'whitewashing history.'

The idea was that it is the oppressive class's tendency (presumably the white establishment,) to take something from history that is not palatable to the ruling establishment, selectively edit it and spin it into something that becomes palatable, and then use it to water down opposing viewpoints by framing it as being in favor of their own viewpoint.

One example that I was given was the great Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

We always hear politicians and people in seats of power within the establishment quote MLK, and it's always very specific quotes like 'Judge people not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.'

Seems benign enough... but then when you look at many of the things that MLK has said that seemingly never get pointed out or discussed, like his views on establishing socialism in the US, or some of the more radical ideas that are more embraced by individuals with a far-left world view, you notice something interesting.

You notice that those things that were said by MLK that don't fit the status quo are virtually never quoted by anyone in the establishment. They are memory-holed, virtually erased from history so that they can prop someone like MLK up to appear as a pro-establishment walking point, even though it was the establishment who opposed MLK during his life and it was most likely the establishment who was responsible for the assassination of MLK.

In this way, it is said that they have taken the message of MLK and 'whitewashed it.'

I will say, it's a valid argument and worth considering to be sure.

My only problem with this idea of 'whitewashing' is that it is framed in such a way to suggest that it is exclusively a racial problem.

Even the phrase 'whitewashing' suggests that something that isn't white is taken and made to be more white.

And this notion of 'whitewashing' is itself racist in a way because it suggests that the dilution of historical people and events and their overarching messages is a tactic that is exclusively used by 'the white mad' as an attack on everyone else, instead of acknowledging that there have been plenty of things from all cultures, including 'white culture' that have been watered down, gentrified, or 'whitewashed' in exactly the same manner!

Let's look at some examples of white culture that have been 'whitewashed' for a second.

How about, for instance, the bible? How often do you hear the establishment frame quotes from the bible as being in favor of a status quo, while someone like Jesus was ardently anti-established, and was also killed by the establishment for being so.

How about - I don't know - say... The Constitution of the US?

Everyone is always selectively editing the constitution to frame it this way or that, conveniently forgetting that the constitution was written by a bunch of hardcore revolutionaries who wanted to enshrine the rights of people to speak against the establishment, or even keep weapons to overthrow the establishment should it ever be necessary? You don't hear pro-establishment actors bring THAT one up too often these days. The ones that do are called 'far right' and accused of being 'oppressive' even though they are defending the rights of people to secure the means of resisting oppression.

This is my problem with a lot of left-wing ideology these days... They may actually say some things that are meaningful and have some good points about them, but inevitably, they always have to shoot their own message in the foot by bringing it back into this thing that is hyper-focused on race and cultural marxism, whereby you take the tenants of Carl Marx and just switch out his thoughts on 'class' with 'race,' which inevitably ignores the grievances of one race over another, creates more racial division and inequality in one form or other.

The part I feel that they are missing is that while they claim to be anti-establishment themselves, they push these racial identity politics, not seeing how this creates a racial division that is actually beneficial to the very oppressive establishment that they are supposedly out to destroy!

The 'oppressive establishment' has benefited more from few if any things more than it has benefited from creating an atmosphere of racism and racial segregation. Even the left would agree with me on that point.. so my question is, why do we need to whitewash the idea of whitewashing into being a weapon of the 'white people to be used against everyone else, when in fact, the establishment will use that tactic against EVERYONE who may threaten their power, regardless of racial connotations.

That is all...
I heard an interesting argument from the leftist camp of thought recently, talking about the idea of 'whitewashing history.' The idea was that it is the oppressive class's tendency (presumably the white establishment,) to take something from history that is not palatable to the ruling establishment, selectively edit it and spin it into something that becomes palatable, and then use it to water down opposing viewpoints by framing it as being in favor of their own viewpoint. One example that I was given was the great Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. We always hear politicians and people in seats of power within the establishment quote MLK, and it's always very specific quotes like 'Judge people not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.' Seems benign enough... but then when you look at many of the things that MLK has said that seemingly never get pointed out or discussed, like his views on establishing socialism in the US, or some of the more radical ideas that are more embraced by individuals with a far-left world view, you notice something interesting. You notice that those things that were said by MLK that don't fit the status quo are virtually never quoted by anyone in the establishment. They are memory-holed, virtually erased from history so that they can prop someone like MLK up to appear as a pro-establishment walking point, even though it was the establishment who opposed MLK during his life and it was most likely the establishment who was responsible for the assassination of MLK. In this way, it is said that they have taken the message of MLK and 'whitewashed it.' I will say, it's a valid argument and worth considering to be sure. My only problem with this idea of 'whitewashing' is that it is framed in such a way to suggest that it is exclusively a racial problem. Even the phrase 'whitewashing' suggests that something that isn't white is taken and made to be more white. And this notion of 'whitewashing' is itself racist in a way because it suggests that the dilution of historical people and events and their overarching messages is a tactic that is exclusively used by 'the white mad' as an attack on everyone else, instead of acknowledging that there have been plenty of things from all cultures, including 'white culture' that have been watered down, gentrified, or 'whitewashed' in exactly the same manner! Let's look at some examples of white culture that have been 'whitewashed' for a second. How about, for instance, the bible? How often do you hear the establishment frame quotes from the bible as being in favor of a status quo, while someone like Jesus was ardently anti-established, and was also killed by the establishment for being so. How about - I don't know - say... The Constitution of the US? Everyone is always selectively editing the constitution to frame it this way or that, conveniently forgetting that the constitution was written by a bunch of hardcore revolutionaries who wanted to enshrine the rights of people to speak against the establishment, or even keep weapons to overthrow the establishment should it ever be necessary? You don't hear pro-establishment actors bring THAT one up too often these days. The ones that do are called 'far right' and accused of being 'oppressive' even though they are defending the rights of people to secure the means of resisting oppression. This is my problem with a lot of left-wing ideology these days... They may actually say some things that are meaningful and have some good points about them, but inevitably, they always have to shoot their own message in the foot by bringing it back into this thing that is hyper-focused on race and cultural marxism, whereby you take the tenants of Carl Marx and just switch out his thoughts on 'class' with 'race,' which inevitably ignores the grievances of one race over another, creates more racial division and inequality in one form or other. The part I feel that they are missing is that while they claim to be anti-establishment themselves, they push these racial identity politics, not seeing how this creates a racial division that is actually beneficial to the very oppressive establishment that they are supposedly out to destroy! The 'oppressive establishment' has benefited more from few if any things more than it has benefited from creating an atmosphere of racism and racial segregation. Even the left would agree with me on that point.. so my question is, why do we need to whitewash the idea of whitewashing into being a weapon of the 'white people to be used against everyone else, when in fact, the establishment will use that tactic against EVERYONE who may threaten their power, regardless of racial connotations. That is all...
Like
2
1 Comments 0 Shares 83 Views