Slashdot Mirror
US Treasury To Feature Harriet Tubman On $20 Bill (reuters.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Harriet Tubman will become the first African-American woman to be featured on the face of U.S. paper currency in more than a century. Tubman was born a slave and went on to become an anti-slavery crusader. Ironically, she will be replacing Andrew Jackson, the seventh President of the U.S. and a slave owner. According to Wikipedia, "Jackson held as many as 44 [slaves] by 1820, and later held up to 150 slaves, making him among planter elite. Throughout his lifetime Jackson may have owned as many as 300 slaves." The decision to feature a woman on a bill started in part from a young girl's letter to President Obama about the lack of women on U.S. currency. A social media campaign "Women on 20s" then began pushing for a woman to replace Jackson on the currency early last year. Originally, the department announced it would feature a woman on the $10 bill instead of Alexander Hamilton. Now it's being reported Hamilton will stay on the front of the bill with a group of women on the back of it. Civil rights era leaders will reportedly be depicted in the new $5 bill.
why did they put Obama? At least he's a president.
While this is a cool idea -- there are no women and no people of color featured on any US bills right now, and that doesn't accurately reflect the demographics of the country -- I can see it causing some confusion. On balance, it's probably a good decision, but this is a pretty major change.
Facts have a liberal bias.
Are we getting closer to being square with African Americans yet?
This is gonna go over great.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
So Harriet Tubman, a former slave, will be put on the front of the new $20 and Andrew Jackson, a slave owner, will be sent to the back of the bus...whoops.. to the back of the bill. Seems right to me!
Waiting for the Youtube videos of store clerks looking wide-eyed at these new bills and proclaiming they're not legitimate currency. It'll be like $2 bills and golden dollars all over again *grabs popcorn*.
Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
jes sayin
yes I know Ben Franklin wasnt a president but come on, presidents on money is just logical.
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
have a look at europe's bills. No people on it. much better! (although I am a bit envious of the pound notes with james watt and charles darwin.)
"Ironically, she will be replacing Andrew Jackson, the seventh President of the U.S. and a slave owner."
They are replacing a picture of a man with a picture of a woman... that is no more ironic than the above sentence.
I know it's ancient tradition and all, but it seems to me like people are probably one of the worst things you can put on your currency. No matter who you choose, it's going to piss off at least a third of the population immediately, and there's a good chance that in fifteen to a hundred years you'll figure out that, by modern standards, the subject committed multiple atrocities.
A few years ago, if you had asked the average citizen to decide who was the least controversial person in American history, someone that would never ever be considered a villain, they might easily have suggested Bill Cosby. Him, or the Stay-Puft Marshmallow man.
After Harriet's had her day, I say we switch over to a big "20" on there instead of a portrait. Or maybe "XX" if people want something a little sexier.
The USA has become an ideological state at this point. Throughout human history, diversity has never worked,and in fact has appeared in empires shortly before their demise. This is because diversity is paradoxical: when two or more groups occupy the same space, there can be no cultural standard in common, which means that government must step in with increasing police actions, leading to tyranny. It is why Plato wrote that tyrants always import people from the colonies.
> all our money
wut ? I thought the military industrial complex receives all american money ?
Who cares? My credit card is a brightly-colored rectangle of plastic and isn't changing.
I like Jackson and the ironic history he brought along with it being on a Federal Reserve bank note and all. They should have brought back the two dollar bill and just had it be an artistic bill where they swap famous figures and landscapes every now and then. Give me my Jackson back!
Tubman is OK with me. What about Tubgirl?
Currency controls were put in place to impact drug trafficking. It didn't work and has imposed hardships on all businesses and citizens who do any transaction over $10,000. They inflated the currency drastically but still limits currency to $100 bills to make portable money more difficult.
End currency controls. Reprint the $1000 and $5000 bill.
Let the free market go and instead of prohibition and funding limits, legalize all illicit substances and simply tax and regulate it. Heck, skip the taxes too.
JJ
cites:
http://www.zerohedge.com/article/its-official-america-now-enforces-capital-controls
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_denominations_of_United_States_currency#/media/File:US-$5000-FRN-1928-Fr-2220g.jpg
/. used to be a tech site - I get too much news already - just too many of these stories - political clickbate that at this point is just more noise to deal with.
I really wish we could moderate the stories themselves...
The Republicans have exchanged ideologies with the Democrats since then, so while this replaced a Democrat in name, what it actually did was emplace a person with something more related to current Republican ideology with a person holding something more related to current Democrat ideology.
History is full of funny gotchas like that. :)
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
I would rather get rid of "In God We Trust" first. Just saying because "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States " Making it clearly illegal.
It also seems that even asking a candidate about their religion also falls under this clause. Of course the small government people will have none of that; they want their theocracy.
At least this one kills two birds with one stone, by featuring a woman who was also African-American. How long until Hispanic, LGBT, etc. groups demand that their respective luminaries appear on our currency?
I often wish we'd gone in the direction some of the Bahamanian currency did.
Oh well.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Black people require more ink. Sometimes it has a very practical reason.
Tubman? How sexist! I was expecting Tubgirl, because "it's 2016".
because my suggestion of putting Margaret Thatcher on the $20 didn't pan out.
I know it's traditional for Slashdot articles to have mangled writing in need of competent proof-reading and editing, but really, come on.
"first African-American to be featured on the face of U.S. paper currency"
+
"first woman on U.S. paper currency in more than a century"
does NOT equal
"first African-American woman to be featured on the face of U.S. paper currency in more than a century."
You can. In the firehose.
Pinky-beige is also a colour.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
Hi, I'm a white person from South Africa. I'm African American.
While Tubman is a good choice (I personally would have preferred Dr. King, but I know they were going for a woman); why wasn't this done via a popular vote?
Were they afraid the American public would vote for Boaty McBoatface?
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
Who really cares though? Does anyone have such a connection to Jackson or Hamilton to care about their ouster? As an aside, I've always found it somewhat ironic for Jackson to be featured on the $20 given his positions on the American central banking system that he removed while in office, which was only later reestablished as the Federal Reserve under Wilson. Jackson didn't appear on the $20 until after that time, perhaps as some kind of cruel jape, but I don't know.
Talking about demographics and limiting it to skin color seems to miss the point. America was a country founded on the ideas of freedom and liberty for all, even though it took quite a while to attain that in fact, and in some ways still isn't there. A strive for equality before the law seems to be an embodiment of American values and something that should constitute large majority demographically. Thinking that I (or anyone else) can't identify with someone like Tubman or the leaders of the civil rights movements because of sex or skin color seems rather misguided. You wouldn't tell a little black girl that she couldn't look up to Ben Franklin because he was an old white dude and doesn't reflect her demographics would you?
I wouldn't mind mixing a few other bills up as well. I'm of the opinion that we could boot Grant from the $50 for Teddy Roosevelt who in addition to being a general badass also exhibited many other traits or characteristics that I feel symbolize the idea of America and the values for which we as a country should strive.
Really the only reason to care is that a person is more concerned with the people doing this for the wrong reason (i.e. so that they can act like they're so great because diversity, etc.) instead of because Tubman and others (Dr. King obviously comes to mind) epitomize some of the ideals on which this country was founded and that make it great. Opposing a reasonable solution just because the people pushing for it are doing so for the wrong reasons doesn't make anyone a better person and smacks of being a moral crusade of its own.
The $10 bill will see a surge of use down there.
Tubman was born a slave and went on to become an anti-slavery crusader
This is about the most boring summary of her life possible.
Try this:
Short version - She was America's Joan of Arc.
Long version - She was beaten nearly to death as a teenage slave, and heard voices the rest of her life, which she believed to be God. Often did what God (the voice) told her to. Listening to God she
Personally, I hope they use her Civil War woodcut portrait, which shows her holding a rifle.
Ok, how about:
Black? No, that's also racist and denigrating, since black is sometimes poetically associated with evil.
Negro? No, that's too close to that other word.
Afro-American? Definitely not. It's lazy, and assumes a particular hair style.
African American? Maybe, but aren't we then excluding Haitians and Jamaicans, among others?
Nubian? Ok, sounds cool, but WTF does that even mean?
Colored? NO! Hearkens back to the fifties with segregated drinking fountains and toilets.
People of Color? Don't ALL people have color?
OK, then how the fuck do we have a conversation in which someone is able to refer to or describe a person with dark skin, but is not of Indian descent and who doesn't just have an overly intense sun tan?
sig: sauer
'People of Color ' is a racist term. It defines people SOLELY by their skin tone.
It identifies people by their skin color. Terms like African American are much more offensive and presumptuous, as they define people by assumptions about their origin (who knows how many generations back) and presumed cultural associations.
Ingenious Americans
That word.. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Excuse me you ignorant FUCK, the motto is LEGAL as it was ordered by the legislature, signed into law by the executive office AND FOUND AS SUCH by the Supreme Court. It's not like they started putting pictures of the Flying Spaghetti Monster on the $1 bill... oh wait... that's NOT a religion at all so they actually could.
You also seem to be confusing the political power of money as a tool (which was what the constitutional convention was all about and the Citizen's United court case) vs the socjus advertising going on here.
Frankly, I won't want to see the beloved US greenbacks turned into monopoly, toy, eurotrash currency!
But I guess its rainbow colored so it has that message going for it.
An actual ruler (length scale) would indeed be useful.
I consider all people humans. Nothing more, nothing less. If you want to have specific conversations about race, you can provide context, but outside of that everyone should just simply be human. People use these terms as full-on identities, instead of the context sensitive terms they are. We talk way too much about race and not enough about simply being better humans.
Good-bye
Yes, a state that is 37% black will reject a dollar bill with a black woman on it. Any other insightful and tolerant ideas Mr. Smug?
America is "obsessed" with slavery because the descendant of slaves were legally treated as second class citizen up until a generation ago and still continue to suffer economic and social repercussions to this day.
A bill featuring a President who made it his mission to destroy central banking?
Why should it reflect "the demographics of the country"? It should be the top important historical figures, decided without considering gender or color.
They all owned slaves as well.
$1, quarter - George Washington
$2, nickel - Thomas Jefferson (though I'd probably give him a pass since he apparently loved one of them, and couldn't free them because of debt)
$50 - Ulysses S. Grant (he gets a pass for freeing them despite being in debt, and the whole kicked the South's butt in the Civil War thing)
$100 - Benjamin Franklin
Or can we skip the made-up rationale, and just say we felt it was about time to put a black / staunch abolitionist / whatever on our money, and we liked Andrew Jackson the least so he's voted off the island? That explanation would be sufficient for most of us. (Out of curiosity, I looked it up - Martha Washington was the first woman on U.S. paper currency - 1886 $1 silver certificate.)
With the treasury planning to stop producing the penny, and " Civil rights era leaders will reportedly be depicted in the new $5 bill," is Abraham Lincoln being removed from US currency?
Setting aside her race and gender, I like this choice for the fact that for once we're acknowledging the importance of someone who wasn't in a leadership position. We have this tendency to celebrate the person in charge and ignore the grunts, especially when it comes to presidents, and I'm glad to see someone else on a bill.
(Yes, Ben Franklin was never technically a president but only because he was too old. He might as well have been one.)
That's a cop out answer. So do I. But, answer the question. Say you and I are having a conversation about a common acquaintance named Jason Jones. And, suppose that we have two friends named Jason Jones, one of whom is what I would refer to as "black."
If you said, "Hey, I saw Jason at the theater", meaning the "black" Jason.
And, I said, "Oh yeah? Which Jason."
What would you say?
sig: sauer
You're going to have to explain why a white european thinks honoring Harriet Tubman is offensive to black Americans...
As for why replace Jackson- there was a push to get a woman on currency, so they'd have to replace somebody. Jackson isn't quite a founding father, and while he's made many great accomplishments for the nation, he comes with a lot baggage from owning slaves, personally killing several people, and arguably engaging in genocide against the native americans.
Does anyone have such a connection to Jackson or Hamilton to care about their ouster?
Amusingly, yes. The next bill due for a change was the $10 bill, but there's currently a Broadway musical about the life of Alexander Hamilton. The producer of that show wrote the treasury and asked them to postpone changing the $10 bill, and apparently they agreed to it.
The whole "people of color" thing has always seemed odd. Black is the absence of color where as white is the combined spectrum, and the presence of all colors. Logically speaking, white people are actually the "people of color."
Proposed change is divisive. And offensive to people of color. If you really want to put a woman of color, a historic personality, I would recommend to put Madam C.J.Walker. Rather than celebrating stubborn personas such as Rosa Parks, or a busybody Harriet Tubman, I would recommend putting C.J.Walker, who was black, former slave, however managed to be inspiration to others, create business and wealth. I guess it is too late, as it is already decided.
I don't understand why you think it is offensive to celebrate black people who fought for civil rights. Your idea of a black role model frankly sounds much more offensive, nothing against C.J. Walker who sounds inspirational, but to make her the centrepiece you're creating a distinction between "uppity blacks" and "good blacks". Not only does that imply that discrimination doesn't exist and black people just need to stop complaining and play by the rules, but you're actually applying that thinking to the 19th century when playing by the rules meant being subjected to legally encoded racism.
Oh, and Walker was born after the end of the civil war in 1867, I don't think she was a slave.
What is this with America's obsession with slavery. In large part of the Europe there was an equivalent of slavery - Serfdom. Serfdom is not romanticized in anyway and a lot of Europeans, pretty much have serfs in their genealogical tree, including myself. Serfdom and Slavery are identical in nature.
The US still talks about slavery in the context of racism because unlike serfdom the basis of slavery was racism.
I stole this Sig
Not to be outdone, the British are going to put Elton John on the 20£ note.
You are writing this, because you were told so but you never did your research. Also you are missing the point that there are lot of wealthy people of color?
What makes you believe that serfs in Europe had different treatment? In Europe, most of the poor were also treated as the property of the state. Just look at conscription practices, naval military recruiting practices, and industrial labor practices. A lot of affluent families in Europe are descendants of the noblemen, of the serf/slave owners. However since there one race in Europe, there was nobody to blame. So they decided to blame rich.
If you have not noticed poor people are treated as a second class citizens irrespective of the race, sex, or national origin. Trying to pin everything on race is shortsighted and unwise.
Here is the link to Huffington Post, which details Top 10 countries where slavery is legal? Couch SJW are recommended to spend their energies and time to address existing issues to abolish slavery TODAY, rather than working on something what is an imaginary issue to get brownie points.
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2...
Michael Jackson should be on the $20 :-)
Sludge rot nowadays :(
have a look at europe's bills. No people on it. much better! (although I am a bit envious of the pound notes with james watt and charles darwin.)
In all likelihood that choice was made because the various EU countries couldn't agree on anything - so they hired Milton Bradley as an outside design consultant.
I kid, I kid...
#DeleteChrome
You know, for when Zombie Andrew Jackson rises from his grave and goes to the treasury to cane the shit out of them for this one. (It doesn't take much to insult Old Hickory, I doubt he'd let a little thing like being dead to stop him from getting even.)
The one with the nappy hair. But seriously, why couldn't you just use something other than appearance to differentiate them? Is it that hard?
You can see a great image of her holding a pistol, and an actual pistol she owned (and probably shot several people with I imagine), here.
I personally think she is a great choice, she is kind of canonical American - a little bit wild, independent, and she made things happen rather than just letting a bad system break her.
I kind of like a motto for the second amendment of "Tubman knew what guns were for, you should too".
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I would recommend to put Madam C.J.Walker.
I'd recommend JJ Walker - it'd be Dy-No-Mite!
#DeleteChrome
Trump is WAY too liberal for this guy.
What would you say?
If ...
He doesn't already have a nickname, catchphrase, favorite hat, or other distinguishing element that we already
We don't know what either car they drives.
We don't know where either works.
We don't know who either's girlfriend is etc...
Then sure I'll eventually end up at 'black Jason' or 'white Jason'.
But honestly, It'll probably be "JJ" or "Honda Jason" or "Jason and Monica Jason" or "Passed-out-at-your-stag Jason"... "Jason from Highschool" or "not Jason from Highschool" or "not Jason and Monica Jason" or "Single Jason" or "Divorced Jason" or "Stupid Jason" or "Guitar Jason" or "Tatoo Jason" or "Manslut Jason" or "Wannabe rapper Jason" or "Bad Hair Jason" or "Cheap Suit Jason" or "Star Trek Jason"...
As long as we're updating our currency, can we finally get rid of that wretched "One Nation Under God" bullshit?
A Black man at 30 years old with no criminal convictions offends at a rate below that of a white man of 30 years of age with no criminal convictions.
I'm quite sure that is the case - because anyone with even a small tendency to crime has ALREADY been filtered out of your cherry-picked subset by the also-fact that quite a larger percentage of young black males will have a conviction than young white males. That may be because of profiling or poverty or whatever, but that is irrelevant in terms of your "fact" being bullshit and terribly misleading.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
There is a world of difference between "conscription practices, naval military recruiting practices, and industrial labor practices" (all of which also inflicted on the descendants of slaves) and actual laws on the books based explicitly on race and ancestry.
Were the descendants of serf banned from voting? Were the descendants of serfs banned from buying property? Did the descendants of serfs have to use separate drinking fountains? Were the descendants of serfs lynched by hooded mobs? These were substantial discriminations still taking place one hundred years after slavery.
What about the difference between:
1) A cunt-with-a-silver-spoon-jammed-up-his-ass owning the fruits of a Serf's labor, and
2) A cunt-with-a-silver-spoon-jammed-up-his-ass Owning a Person
Effectively it's the same.
Everything a slave owner could do to a slave, a noble could do to a serf.
You forgot to mention the musical is wildly popular (sold out nearly a year in advance now) so it's not just New Yorkers raising a fuss about Hamilton - also it should be noted that complicating matters as far as racial politics go, is that Hamilton is all black actors only so in essence getting rid of Hamilton now is like tossing out a black man from the currency.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
have a look at europe's bills. No people on it. much better! (although I am a bit envious of the pound notes with james watt and charles darwin.)
The German 10 DM used to have a picture of Carl Gauss on it. At least they did back when I was living there in the late 90s. Or, were you under the mistaken impression that Germany is not part of Europe?
You forgot your #FeelTheBern sig.
Andrew Jackson was primarily an asshole, who coincidentally owned slaves.
Facts have a liberal bias.
No. Facts have no bias. Ideologues have bias. How about no people on the currency at all? Just use the American flag or the statue of liberty.
German money, pre-Euro, used to have Carl Gauss (and his curve), Paul Ehrlich and the Brothers Grimm among others.
That's the point. The newspeak redefinitions are meant to make it difficult to describe concepts deemed politically incorrect.
Blame Canada, that's where she grew up and became popular. Possibly Germany as well depending on how you think early childhood shaped her music career.
He was the only President to achieve a ZERO Federal Debt !!!
Now, I agree that he has some warts on his life. Trail of Tears, etc...
But I don't think you can find many of our Presidents without scandal, bad decisions or other things.
They all lived in a different era. Political Correctness is no way to revise history or Science.
This is my opinion based on what little I know and understand of the rumors and lies Thanks, Randal
No. Color is a descriptor that tags various attributes. I suppose your dr is racist and sexist for using those descriptors to customize your healthcare?
You're applying logic to 'social justice'? There's your problem.
Yes. They're spelled differently.
Why even call it a twenty? Call it what it is a $2 bill. After all the inflation that is all it's worth these days.
His last name? The funny one? The one whose feet smells? bad breath, scars, hairy/not hairy, bald, glasses, cowboy boots........
Good-bye
Wouldn't Tubgirl be more the speed of the US of A?
I'm blaming whoever wrote "ironically" in the summary, since there is no irony at all. A contrast, yes, but no irony.
heh if the dollar was somehow equal to toy eurotrash currency it would currently gain 13% more value.
not really, historically those are basically interchangeable.
Jack Lew may not be able to sign his own name in a form that's recognizable, but he did make a good choice. Even a blind squirrel finds an acorn every once in a while.
Harriet Tubman is a perfect choice. She was a tough, God-fearing woman who was determined to do the right thing at any cost. We need more people like her.
I do believe if she were alive today, she'd kick Hillary Clinton's ass in any election.
Good thing I do everything via credit card or debit card.
Don't wanna get caught with that crap in my ass pack.
Abraham Lincoln seems to deserve to stay on a bill. I can see why they are all for removing Andrew Jackson, he was not exactly a pillar of fidelity, or a decent human being, even by the standards of the era he came from.
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
Barbara Bush is on the $1 bill.
They should put a woman on $1 bills instead, so you can tell at a glance which bill to take to a strip club.
Of course there were actual laws, and it would be too awkward for the children of serfs not also to be serfs. Conditions were too harsh in those days to talk about water fountain privileges, but it does seem true they had more freedom and status than black plantation slaves, mainly due to supply, since there wasn't a continent of white savages and cannibals that was putting its own people up for sale.
I consider all people humans.
I hope you aren't a college student, because you can get in trouble for saying that. Seriously... it's a "microaggression" enshrined in official policy at several colleges, more to come soon I'm sure.
Why is this a "microaggression? To quote the cited policy from above: "Statements that indicate that a White person does not want to or need to acknowledge race." (That doesn't really explain anything IMHO. I guess if you are a White person [capital letter in original] you are obliged to "acknowledge race"... whatever that means. TL;DR It just is a microaggression, shut up.) But if you are lucky enough to be a non-White person, I guess maybe you would be permitted to say that? Eh, probably better not to risk it.
Remember that Martin Luther King Jr. said he had a dream that people would be judged, not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character? This is considered "problematic" now.
Personally I agree with you. Even if statistically some things correlate with race, we should attempt to be color-blind in policy and in our interpersonal relations. However, I'm a white male, so my opinion is considered worse than wrong by the people who care about microaggressions.
I was raised on the slogan "sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me." The current crop of college students is being taught that nothing is more important than words and labels, and that rather than trying to be a good person or set a good example that they should be invoking authority to smack down people over minor offenses.
I thought this was America! Shouldn't we at least get to vote in a rigged election on it?
From wikipedia: "One of her last missions into Maryland was to retrieve her aging parents. Her father, Ben, had purchased Rit, her mother, in 1855 from Eliza Brodess for 20 dollars".
This is about $550 in today's dollars according to one site.
If you were African American (or more accurately, American African), you'd be red, not white. What you are, is European African.
Since in this scenario, we're all friends, I'd prolly use something that would otherwise be considered very derogatory. No, not that word. Prolly not any word you're thinking of, but it would definitely be derogatory. Since again, we're friends in this scenario.
Now, if we were all total strangers, IDK.
The next redesign of a bill should be another former slave who managed to gain his freedom and become a very successful businessman.
I hereby propose than Anthony Jackson should be featured on the $50 bill.
I was shocked when I discovered that the idea of changing the person on a US bill shocked me :). I didn't realize that I would care, but I sort of do. I don't mean to slight Harriet Tubman (although, wasn't there someone more famous?), but I just think that the founders are the founders and they should stay on the money. You can update the portraits, that's fine... but changing people?... seems too much.
As a total aside, I also think that the 'state' quarters were a godawful idea.
I guess I just don't like change when it comes to my change. Or my bills.
Just give me two tens
I am an ethnic Chinese, from China
To me, racial background of a person is not important - what is important is the content inside - the personality
That is why, till this day I cannot understand the sheer hatreds towards the 'White Men' as espoused by the Democrats and the 'liberals'
Is a non-White Man automagically 'better' than a White man?
Am I, a Chinese, better than any White man out there, just because I am a Chinese?
Is a Black woman better than a White man, just because she is a Black, and she is a woman?
How can anyone judge a person solely based on the racial profile and the gender of that person?
What kind of crap is this? I don't understand!
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
that young girl needs to go to the post office more often..
Your is a nation of cowards. Stop making stupid comments. America had an internal refugee crisis at the time that was worse than what was going on in Syria. This woman helped many people get to safety and some even became Canadian citizens (a much kinder nation).
She was a republican and a huge gun rights advocate.
That's pretty ironic but she was closer to Ted Cruz than Hillary Clinton or Sanders.
Why don't we do what the EU does and not put individuals on money at all? Let's put natural wonders on US bills.
Seriously? We've gotten so SJW that we're applying disparate impact claims to money?
Jesus. You want to ditch AJ, that's fine, he's kind of a horrible asshole. But Harriet Tubman? "Yeah, okay, we gotta find a black woman to put on a bill, is there anyone worthy? Rosa Parks hasn't been dead long enough."
No, the liberals just think that white men have so long been so responsible for so much MORE pain and suffering and other horrible things, that they become better people if they make concerted efforts to undo those 'atrocities' by ignoring the white men and the descendents of white men (no matter how long ago), slandering them, excluding them, and endangering themselves and others in the process.
I had a sucky sig.
I opened the comments just to see the shit show that was the discussion for this. Believe you me, you did not disappoint.
Thank you for being predictable, and keep on being classy.
Well, there's also the fact that Hamilton basically set up the entire US Treasury and financial system. If there's anyone other than Washington that deserves to be on a bill, it's Hamilton. Personally, I suspect the Hamilton thing was a sort of false-flag operation: you say you want to replace Hamilton, everyone says that's totally wrong, you can't replace him, replace someone else - oh wait, let's replace the Indian-killing slave-owning white dude on the twenty. But if you'd gone after the Indian-killing slave-owning dude on the twenty to start with, nobody would have gone along. Battle of New Orleans, homie. Yeah, it was after the official peace. Bet you history would have looked different if he had lost it, though.
'People of Color ' is a racist term. It defines people SOLELY by their skin tone.
Duh.
Of course it's a racist term. We're using that racist term because we're discussing races in the USA in a situation where the race is defined by their skin tone.
now that was truly funny!
the various bills cost 5.5 to 10.9 cents each to produce, so I don't really think skin tone ink is a major cost factor.
We've had these people on currencies in the past, over a hundred years ago. I also think in the past that currencies changed more often but for a relatively long period the US seemed to be stuck with an attitude that money shouldn't be changed (waste of money, if it was good enough for granddad then it's good enough for me, don't change what ain't broke, etc). So we were stuck with the same boring people for a long time.
Now that it's changing I like it. Keep it changing regularly and people will stop freaking out when it happens and stop accusing it of being some sort of liberal plot to overthrow the government.
In Hamilton's time that would be the government treasury. As in "We the People". Whereas for the past 100 years we have had the 1% of the 1%'s treasury. You can see why Hamilton had to go.
I come here for the love
In the distant past we've had other non presidens on currency. Such as Martha Washington on a silver certificate.
I've always found it somewhat ironic for Jackson to be featured on the $20 given his positions on the American central banking system that he removed while in office, which was only later reestablished as the Federal Reserve under Wilson. Jackson didn't appear on the $20 until after that time, perhaps as some kind of cruel jape, but I don't know.
That is the primary reason I'm sad about this move. Every time I look at a $20 it makes me laugh to think how much Jackson would have hated that.
As for Tubman....why not? A slave-owning democrat (a founder of the party) just got replaced by a gun-toting Republican. Long live freedom! Let that flag wave, boys!!
So you got owned by a well founded post with citations, and you respond with more emotional ranty bullshit.
Get off the Internet, please. Everyone is tired of the same old "WAH ITS ALL RACISM AND THATS WHY I FAIL" nonsense.
http://qz.com/556988/here-are-...
Now adjust for income. Oops!!
A lot of baggage, or only the slavery one? Most the "founding fathers" had slaves, even Benjamin F who later was against it.
So he killed some people dueling, that's fair game.
Genocide? Certain parts of some tribes were moved, while others are still in their original lands to this day. Followed orders, that's for sure.
They both have the same last name (Jones). Read more carefully.
... you know, I could go on, but this is just ridiculous. He was born black -- he's been black all his life. Ethnicity is one of the FIRST things every NORMAL person notices (not cowboy boots or glasses, which may vary from day to day.) Seriously, referring to him as the black Jason is fine and natural -- there's nothing wrong with it and, to go out of your way to avoid it is fucking pedantic.
Funny is a subjective evaluation. Skin color is not.
Either one can have bad breath
sig: sauer
Because appearance is the FUNDAMENTAL point of personal knowledge. Before you know someone's name, personality, preferences or anything else about them, you know their appearance.
sig: sauer
Weird, but shot like that is fun to pull on the census Bureau.
This is Obamunism crap that better be scrubbed away when that vain peacock of a traitor or enemy agent vacates his White Hut in Jan'17.
No nigger bills for me, I'll reject any given to me, and ask for a white person bill. Black lives suck.
No doubt about it.
The Tea Party is about fiscal responsibility.
No, if you want real racists you'll have to go look in a mirror - for you seems care far more about racial purity than any Tea Party member, you filthy bigot.
It may be politically correct to do this, but I don't get the end-game. It seems in the current generation it is a politically correct common-theme bullshit that is wrapped up in a bow to systematically bow down to a demographic that is in-favor at the current millisecond. The westward expansion of this country was founded on the dead backs of the Native Americans that were here first. No amount of "reparations" for slavery for people that were brought here illegally, after being sold by their own people, will replace how the indigenous natives of North America were systematically compressed into small plots of crap-tastic land to appease the "settlers". How about we skip Harriet and start replacing currency pictures with the people that were here first. Let's see how many millennials, plutocrats, left-wingers and those that deem themselves the rulers of what is recently deemed "PC" justify how this currency change makes more sense? Who remembers the trail of tears? Is it still a part of the curriculum of U.S. middle/high schools? History has documented how the British killed tens of thousands of American Indians by using blankets infected with smallpox.. yet the current media doesn't cover this. (http://nativeamericannetroots.net/diary/252) I fail to see the significance of this currency change as it only appeases one race in this country we sometimes refer as a "Melting Pot". Peace out.
Of course while continuing to benefit from all of the advancements to society, technology, medicine, industry, etc, that white men have developed.
Not to mention that there were black slave owners too.
...where she belongs.
Well.. better than tubgirl
In the distant past we've had other non presidens on currency. Such as Martha Washington on a silver certificate.
Distant past? How about Alexander Hamilton on the $10 bill? And Sacagewea on the dollar coin, preceded by Susan Anthony?
It's stuff the upperclass wants us to fight over to keep us from doing anything about the upper class. This stuff started happening during the Occupy protests, it was clearly political sabotage.
We've had years of teaching our kids that labeling people is bad and it's what is on the inside that counts. That's not good enough for these people.
Wow. Just wow.
Speaking as a non-American I used to believe that "America is fucked therefore Americans are fucked."
Reading this thread however I'm now convinced that "Americans are fucked therefore America is fucked."
Well you are, but barely. Since your ethnicity can be traced to the far east, you're stuck in a similar boat as the honkies. A history of significant inventions and ideas, combined with a culture that currently produces (statistically) more successful and intelligent people means that you too are evil.
By "other presidents" I meant other than the couple already mentioned so far.
And by currency I meant paper currency and not coins.
I like the terminology we used in the Marines. You were either dark green or light green. All Marines are green.
It identifies people by their skin color. Terms like African American are much more offensive and presumptuous, as they define people by assumptions about their origin (who knows how many generations back) and presumed cultural associations.
It's very problematic. Such as when Bush referred to Kofi Annan, an African African (see how silly that sounds) as "African American". Also, unless you're very good at identifying racial origins by appearance (which is not even always possible), you're likely to identify an Aboriginal Australian American as African American, or possibly an Indian American (distinct from Native American American) or Polynesian American, or Southeast Asian American, etc.
The currency needs a whole new design, period. More color, translucent holograms, clear windows,etc. American currency is ridiculously old fashioned and the Federalist design style is too stuffy. And any redesign should involve regular refreshes of featured items, whether it's people or natural wonders or engineering achievements.
Just call them niggers and get it over with.
Odd, given that it was white men who ended slavery, forcefully, across the world. Odd also given that white men and women were victims of slavery by the millions, at the hands of slave masters of all races.
Unless they are goddamn Doublemint twins, there will be a differentiator besides race.
Good-bye
I agree, and I'm a pale blue-eyed dude.
Besides, I find it hilarious that ideological leftists would lobby so hard to replace a dead Democrat president with a Republican who happened to have a strong love for the Second Amendment... Me, I'm good with that.
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
"Thanks to the pay gap, the twenty will now be wrorth $17." - Steven Colbert
Boot Grant and put Sherman on it.
Play Command HQ online
>>Dr. King obviously comes to mind
Sorry. Seeing as we're renaming colleges dedicated to any 200 year old white male that wasn't progressive enough for 21st century standards, we have standards now.
King cheated on his wife a lot. According to official SJW Tolerance rules, this makes him a terrible person and he's automatically disqualified. In fact, we need to start taking down roads and holidays that bear his name. History's greatest monster.
The Surpreme Court was full of shit: "It is quite obvious that the national motto and the slogan on coinage and currency 'In God We Trust' has nothing whatsoever to do with the establishment of religion."
And equal justice advocacy is just as political as anything else. And it's about time you bigots and misogynists got called out for it.
And as for Jackson, he deserved to be hanging from a tree for crimes against humanity. Along with the rest of the slave owning bigots. And at least one of them people seem to worship is documented as keeping his own son as a slave. Yeah so much for family values of the founding fathers.
That's how the b.
What color is the new note?
Orange? Or is that Tubgirl?
Death marched, you mean.
Play Command HQ online
Clearly he was speaking about Euros.
Seems like a sexiest decision, not to mention racist. There are not colored people on US bills because the country was founded by white people.
But it is kinda fitting, people care about Harriet Tubman as much as they care about physical money.
Not the best example. Egyptians are clearly from Africa, and if they migrate to the USA they are African Americans.
They're not Black, though.
a,e,i,o,u and sometimes w and y (at be if of up cwm by)
Sure. One of them could be a paraplegic. Then, we could call him "wheelchair Jason." The point is, what the hell is so wrong with using race as a differentiator? By positing that there is something wrong, you are inferring that one race might be favorable over another -- actual racism.
Going back to my original, hypothetic situation, what if you instead saw "white" Jason at the theater? I say, "Which Jason?" Is it so wrong to reply, "White Jason"? Would this cause us all to pucker and wince the same way? Why? Is this less racist or derogatory?
The answer is, NO. It's not less racist -- it acknowledges race. And that's fine. We live on a planet with many difference, beautiful races and it's okay to see this, and recognize this, acknowledge this in our speech, and identify this in our society.
sig: sauer
"If Hitler was on the $20 bill, how would the Jews feel?"
corporate avenger
Does he look like a bitch?
lol if you did that, the south would secede again.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
I've been saying this ever since I first heard of the occupy movement. Why the fuck are we demonizing anybody who makes a lot of money? That reminds me of black neighborhoods that demonize success as "acting white". It's stupid and oversimplifies the shit out of the situation.
Besides, half of the so called 1% label themselves as liberal progressives.
By the way, using a label like "1%" or in the derogatory "a 1%er" is so fucking arbitrary it's beyond stupid. 1% of what? Recent circumstances have dramatically increased my income to ~80k USD per year, which according to globalrichlist.com puts me in the top 0.1% of income earners. Oh but wait, we're talking just the 1% of US income earners? Then why the fuck have I seen Europeans and Asians mention the 1%? And why is it the top 1% and not the top 2%?
It really truly is as arbitrary as labeling somebody based on the color of their skin.
The occupy movement are really just a bunch of bigots by another name, only because they supposedly represent the "underdogs" somehow, and for really no logical reason at all, it justifies everything they do.
In general I agree with this, but (especially in most parts of the US), the majority of people are white, so if you're identifying someone by their race, it's going to be much more likely that you will use the non-white person's skin color as the identifier. Objectively speaking, there's nothing wrong with that. But this doesn't exist in a vacuum.
Calling someone "wheelchair Jason" (which Jason will probably hear over and over and over) can make people (i.e., Jason) think that that's the one characteristic that defines him - people only see him as having a wheelchair, or being black. Sure, those things aren't bad, but white people, and/or able-bodied people get defined by other things, like "funny Jason," or "rich Jason," or "Jason who is allergic to strawberries." It's a minor difference, sure, but words have a huge impact on individual self-worth.
Actually liberals (and everyone else) should hate wealthy, powerful people. That is the narrowest description for the group of people who have wreaked the most havoc, been the most cruel to the most people, etcetera. However, for some reason (I suspect because the winners write history) that has been deflected upon the much larger group called "white men." This is incredibly convenient for the wealthy because now everyone's hate is directed at a huge group of people who, mostly, had nothing to do with, and did not really profit from the sins of the wealthy. Were/are a lot of white men racist? Yes. Did a lot of white men actually own slaves? No. But those slave owners were able, through their power, to control the conversation and convince a lot of white people that Africans were subhuman, and thus it was OK for the wealthy to enslave Africans rather than pay those non-wealthy white people to work on the plantations.
Is racism bad? Yes. Do I think racists are assholes? Most vehemently! But i still understand that their racism is the result of a massive, multi-generational propaganda campaign instituted by the wealthy slave owners to rationalize their crimes against humanity: Not just against the slaves, but also against the poor white people who the wealthy put out of work and replaced with slaves.
Similar interpretations can be applied across the board. All these situations boil down to nothing but a massive campaign to both divide and conquer, and to serve as a distraction to keep us all from coming after the wealthy with pitchforks in our hands.
That is what we are talking about. Lots of people do not consider whites to be truly human; they are just sickly pale evolutionary dead ends. To be truly human you need to be a black man, or plucky disadvantaged Latino struggling and thriving despite the overwhelming odds. It is truly strange that we have been putting non humans on our currency all these years.
There is nothing to understand here until you allow that this pc / social justice movement is designed, created and financed by people aiming to bring about a total collapse of society so they can rebuild it to their liking. Their liking, not yours.
Prove that half of the 1%s label themselves as "liberal progressives". Do that, or your argument is nothing more than flapping your gums in a vain attempt to make a point.
And yes, you might be in the top 0.1% of the world, but as you aren't buying groceries from Kenya or getting taxed by Vietnam, it is clearly a pointless argument. You understand how countries work, right? How economies function? Taxes and tax burdens, right? Because the only way your "argument" makes any sense is if the answer to all of those is "no".
The logic behind the occupy movement stands, even if you are too dense to understand it.
Odd, given that it was white men who ended slavery, forcefully, across the world. Odd also given that white men and women were victims of slavery by the millions, at the hands of slave masters of all races.
Totally. If I punch you in the face constantly for an hour, when I stop I am a hero and you should definitely thank me.
I'm calling it, the next guy on the $50 bill will be Trump.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Only in the mangled grammar of Slashdot articles does
"first African-American on the face of U.S. paper currency"
+
"first woman in more than a century"
=
"first African-American woman to be featured on the face of U.S. paper currency in more than a century"
I know your name, a little of your personality and preference, but not your appearance. I know quite a few people I've only ever communicated with over email or the phone.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
America was a country founded on the ideas of freedom and liberty for all
What a crock - citation required. I don't believe this myth for a fucking second.
And you still haven't got there, and probably never will, because most Americans' ideas of "freedom and liberty" are only "freedom and liberty to eat, drink, smoke, sleep, drive, fuck, worship, work, wear clothes and educate like I do - the others be damned to hell".
America is a country founded on wholesale appropriation, massacre, genocide, corruption, white man's privilege and slavery. Stick that in your pipe.
You should put fucking Manson on your money.
While I appreciate your good intentions, the problem with ignoring things like race is that it ignores the very real differences and challenges that different groups have. It reminds me of those bogus intelligence test results that claimed black people were just genetically dumber, without accounting for the fact that the tests were biased towards western white culture.
We can acknowledge race and gender and sexual orientation without discriminating against them.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
It's a stupid drawing on a stupid piece of paper.
racist trolls on our internet. bad enough seeing this kind of shit in real life. stupid racist trolls.
A lot of 1%ers wouldn't mind paying more taxes, as long as it's a fair playing field: every rich has to pay more.
Since people are no source of light but reflect light you are completely wrong. A surface with no color reflects all light and is white while a surface with all colors reflects no light and is black. That's why a clean sheet of paper is white and not black.
You have to study history. I'm not even American and I know democrats were not liberal before the last century.
You're making no sense.
What does the LEGALITY of "In God We Trust" refute that it was POLITICAL?
And are you trying to imply that the decision to put Harriet Tubman on the bill is NOT legal?
To me, racial background of a person is not important - what is important is the content inside - the personality
That is why, till this day I cannot understand the sheer hatreds towards the 'White Men' as espoused by the Democrats and the 'liberals'
It is a noble sentiment, and it would be a better world if everybody shared it. However, I think you misrepresent the situation to some extent; these initiatives are not born of hate to white people, but are attempts at rebalancing a society that is still institutionally stacked against certain groups of people. In this case, the lady in question has a background that represents the struggle against racism and slavery in America in a particularly poignant way, and I think it is a very sympathetic gesture with great symbolic value to put her on a bank note. I think many people will look at it and feel a little bit better in some way.
What kind of crap is this? I don't understand!
No, it is hard to understand, I suppose; especially if you are young and haven't grown up in Europe or America. In my lifetime I have seen the race race riots in the US on television, the anti-war movement in the 60es and the ground-in suspicion against the Germans, the USSR and China. And I have seen these things and many others change for the better in most cases. I can recall how we all were casually racist - we would laugh at jokes about black people, people would talk about the scandal of somebody marrying a black person and so on; our ignorance perhaps made this innocent in a sense, but the thing is, what is done, is done, and looking back, I wish it hadn't been like that. The injustices we took part in sholdn't have been, and the problem with systematic injustice like this is that it sticks around for generations; when a group of people is pushed out to the poorest end of society, they don't get education, and even if society changes and don't keep them out because of skin colour, they now keep them out because they don't have the right education, and so it keeps rolling on. That's why the job still is not done - we may be getting in the right direction, and I think we are, but there is some way to go, and it is right that we keep going.
There are plenty of social and political websites. Even granting that this is significant news quite worthy of discussion, why is it featured on Slashdot? Neither social (in)justice, political history, nor the iconography of national currencies seem to have much relevance to specifically technical or 'geeky' interests.
Please understand this as an honest question, not a snipe or putdown. I don't mean to offend, but even knowing that 'geeks' are often in fact well rounded individuals with a wide array of interests I just don't understand. The subjects in this article seem as relevant to the core, historical function of Slashdot as would discussions of pasta recipes on a site dedicated to restoring classic cars - not offensive or "inappropriate", just irrelevant.
Would anyone care to comment?
Vain peacock? Trump is not in the White House and never will be. You are mistaken.
Liberal also meant liberty before the last century.
If you punch me in the face for an hour, should your grandchildren apologize to my grandchildren for you being an idiot?
What are "civil rights"? Oh, you mean the right of non-whites to FORCE themselves into white people's living space.
Why aren't millions of white people moving to Africa, India and China every year? Possibly because we don't want to live around other races. Why can't they leave us alone? Why didn't all the black 'civil rights' leaders move to AFRICA and simply escape from 'inequality', 'injustice' and 'racism' that way?
You will have a racist society, or an equivalent fascist-newspeaking society, until the day one can reply 'the black one' without anybody implying it's an offense.
An object that reflects red light is called "red", right? And an object that reflects blue light is called "blue". Therefore it's perfectly logical that an object that reflects all colours of light would be called "coloured".
No, the person who comes along and stops you from punching GP in the face for an hour is a hero and should definitely be thanked, regardless of whether that person is white, black, Jewish, or Wookiee.
Nobody has mentioned the obvious reason why Madison was retained on our currency, but Jackson removed.
Bankers. Madison was the quintessential prototype of a central banker while Jackson was their reviled enemy after having dissolved the Second Bank of the United States.
In 100 years the Federal Reserve has destroyed the savings of millions, and even now is stepping up the pace through plans for negative interest rates.
Nicely put. Wealthy and powerful people are the very reason why the fringe lunatics on the left put white men down. Minorities see the wealthy white males enjoying easy jobs, excessive money, and otherwise strolling through life, and start thinking it's a white male thing. Then poor white males, the ones who have to work, struggle, suffer, go hungry, make do without affirmative action, etc. wind up getting shamed and blamed for being privileged because the minorities have that polarizing image of the wealthy white male burned into their memory. This exact same principle is the reason why non-blacks are quick to assess blacks as being scary deviants.
No, the liberals just think that ...
If there's one sure fire way to win an argument, it's to create the other person's argument for them, then argue against that.
It's so much easier than arguing the actual argument.
There is no such hatred, you've made it up. The answer is as simple as that.
but this is a pretty major change.
Who does it affect really? In my country we have two faces on each bill (one each side) and I couldn't name one of them. It makes no difference to anything I do, so couldn't care one bit whose face was on there.
There is no such hatred. You and others have made it up entirely. It's a US-only phenomenon, part of a delusion that was fostered by conservative US citizens when they realized that they cannot portray their country as the land of the good and free in light of overwhelming evidence to the contrary (Abu Ghraib, Iraq War, kidnapping, drone strikes, torture, etc.). It's a normal defensive reaction to find some cause and enemy in 'the others', no big deal and no need to bother as long as you keep your irrational feelings about 'liberals' halfway in check and remain reasonable.
Liberals don't hate white people. They just acknowledge that there has been a long standing bias towards white people, and that while it's a lot better today it's still far more perfect. Simply acknowledging that does not imply hatred of white people.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
There is no such hatred. You and others have made it up entirely. It's a US-only phenomenon, part of a delusion that was fostered by conservative US citizens when they realized that they cannot portray their country as the land of the good and free in light of overwhelming evidence to the contrary (Abu Ghraib, Iraq War, kidnapping, drone strikes, torture, etc.). It's a normal defensive reaction to find some cause and enemy in 'the others', no big deal and no need to bother as long as you keep your irrational feelings about 'liberals' halfway in check and remain reasonable.
I know that's not what you'd like to hear, but it's the truth.
So next we'll have an indian, a mexican and an asian, all in the name of demographics, righ? ...
So why stop at demographics? Let's go for diversity: a muslim, a buddhist, a gay/lesbian/transgender and so on.
Oh, don't forget people with disabilties: cretins/morons and the like, people with physical handicaps
The nigger?
I see someone who never lived near big areas of "diversity" humans.
NPR reporting http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/04/20/474983292/treasury-decides-to-put-harriet-tubman-on-20-bill that a portrait of Andrew Jackson will still be present on the back of the Tubman twenty.
What. The. Fuck. The US Treasury is offering an olive branch to the fans of a proud slave-holding author of genocide (Trail of Tears)? Jesus wept.
Wait what? Either that's the best sarcasm I've read in a while, or I've completely misunderstood the whole of human history (along with pretty much most others).
Hi, I'm a white person from South Africa. I'm African American.
Reminds me of my Egyptian coworker who applied for and won a scholarship for African Americans. They weren't happy when they discovered this, but couldn't do anything to overturn it.
Just another day in Paradise
What do you mean by "civil rights"? Do you mean "the right to FORCE myself into the lives and living space of people who don't want to live with me"? How awful of white people, simply wanting to continue living with THEIR OWN KIND. Why do you think that shouldn't be allowed, and ONLY for white people? 'Racist' much?
Next time, try thinking things through, because you obviously haven't got a clue why you believe what you believe...
There's been centuries of subjugation of other races by the "white man" which has resulted in systemic injustice towards them. As one example, a century after abolition of slavery, there were still lynching of black people and segregation, across the US. That isn't equality. To correct that you need to put forward role models that are not "white men", because that helps show that the universal symbol of success isn't "white men".
These subjugated groups were primarily subjugated by discrimination on the basis of race, religion and gender. Which is why we're trying to help those groups of people (black, latino for race; catholics, jews for religion; and women re gender). That's it. It's fairly straightforward. There's no hatred, except for some nutbags who will always harbour hatred towards something or the other.
Uuuh, no. Wait. $20!
Black people bitch and moan constantly in the U.S. , but won't take the free programs to move back to Africa.
Why? Oh yea because the U.S. Has great technology developed by white people. How many CEOs or any execs at top tech firms are black?
It's not racism it's recognizing a pattern of behavior amongst a group of people who think they themselves went through slavery and should be entitled to free living.
I'm happy what's happened the last 8 yrs the "correct" movement keeps pushing and now we give you trump.
Go ahead tell me Trump won't get elected. Look at Alex Tspiras of Greexe, his election alone shows you that a celebrity outsider can very well get elected today
If the punching caused me to have grandchildren, who are called "punchies", and who have difficulty getting an education or job or general societal success, then yeah a fucking apology would be a start, not to mention some work to make sure your grandfather's assholery doesn't affect the grandchildren.
And here we have a Prime example of that irrational hatred of all things expressed by the left. They are unable to recognize that the acts of a few are not the acts of all (thus the citation of Abu Ghraib, the actions of a very small group of junior enlisted personnel) and basically a hatred of anything the US does, regardless of whether it removes a brutal dictator from power, allows for specific targeting of very precise locations rather than just carpeting a square kilometer with high explosive bombs to kill one bad guy (and everything else in that km2).
There is such hatred. And any attempt to disagree with them is instantly labeled as hatred based on racism, sexism or some other ism. Rather than simply a disagreement of opinions.
If you punch me in the face for an hour, should your grandchildren apologize to my grandchildren for you being an idiot?
If you never did? And got away with it? Most certainly yes, your family should apologize.
...unless they really enjoy having a feud. I guess I don't know you. Perhaps you are from Tug Fork, West Virginia, and that's how people roll there. I'm not gonna judge.
Andrew Jackson's primary claims to fame, and a large reason he was electable to government, was the Battle of New Orleans in the War of 1812, which made him a war hero, and the Seminole War. A war in which he basically, as leftists would say, raped and pillaged the native American population.
The removal of Jackson only leaves two war heroes on Federal Reserve Bank Notes that you might see. George Washington on the $1 and Ulysses Grant on the $50.
"Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
What about Nubians?
Time to offend someone
Well, actually, it'll still be three.
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
People don't demonize Warren Buffet or Elon Musk, and they made lots of money. They have demonized Lloyd Blankfein, and Kenneth Lay, and Dennis Kozlowski, and (yes) Mitt Romney. There is a difference in terms of how they made their money and how they have (or not) abused the system. There are a large number of people making obscene amounts of money by fraud, rigging the system, lobbying congress, and screwing things up for the rest of the planet. "The Big Short" is a good example.
The more people I meet, the better I like my dog.
No, it's not laudable. Niggers and bitches shouldn't be on our money. Niggers just steal it, women are just estrogen-based parasites that spend it all and take it from men.
--
Make America White Again!
Trump 2016
Please provide a better reason to dissuade me than than. I would support William Tecumseh Sherman over Grant on some currency.
Time to offend someone
How quaint. I can't remember the last time I had a $20 in my wallet. Besides, my credit card has a nice picture of me on it!
both the white savior and white slavery stories are myth.
Melanin enhanced?
I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
It might be wise for them to do so, because their grandchildren may have heard the story about how sociopathic your grandfather was and have reason to believe that you have a tendency towards the same behavior. And judging by your comment, it seems like you probably do.
Yeah, history's a bitch like you wouldn't believe. Especially when you ignore it.
Andrew Jackson had much more in common with todays republicans than with todays democrats.
or did you forget that whole part where the parties slowly exchanges positions on civil rights, switching who was liberal, and who was conservative/racist?
Why would it be hilarious?
Jackson in no way represented an ideological leftist.
But Harriet Tubman certainly was, as an early pioneer for both civil rights and women's equality.
Or did you miss that whole part where between the Civil War and the Civil Rights movement majorities the ideologies of the parties shifted and essentially traded places? (really the purifying of the parties as the opposing wings left for the opposite party) The parties used to be amalgamations of many conflicting viewpoints based more on region and history, than on party label.
Why do people always ignore the great sorting that occurred as the factions began leaving for like minded fellow, and the parties became more cohesive monolithic platforms that we have today, in order to make vacuous points based on outdated labels?
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
still does jackass.
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
So when a black man kills someone, you go around looking for some black man to lynch; anybody will do as long as he has the same skin color? Thanks for clearing up what a despicable racist you are.
The fact is that slavery in the US was an institution created by the British empire and maintained by a minority of Southerners. At the time, the majority of Americans was opposed to it, and many Americans lost their lives fighting against it. And the majority of Americans today are descendants of people who arrived after slavery was abolished, often fleeing economic servitude and oppression themselves, starting from nothing in the US, and facing massive discrimination themselves. To lump all these people together based on nothing more than skin color makes you no different from a typical white supremacist.
My grandfather didn't "punch anybody in the face". He wasn't even in the US. Being neither British nor American by birth, I am totally unrelated to American slave owners. Yet because my skin is light and the skin of British colonial slave owners is white, you lump us together. That makes you a stinking racist.
And the real irony behind your "inheritable sociopathy" argument is that the population with the largest percentage of slave owner ancestry in their genes in the US is actually African Americans, because African American slaves were frequently raped by their owners, and genetics doesn't depend on whether the sex was consensual or not.
I can't understand why not going with a white man 100% of the time is considered hatred of white men.
I think in the next 10 - 20 years or so when the millennials start getting into office they will replace all people on all money with emojis.
No, you don't know my name. You don't know my personality or preference. You know a little of my Slashdot online persona. You don't even know my gender.
But, this is all irrelevant. In the hypothetical scenario I outlined above, my friends of differing ethnicity are personal, hand-shakable acquaintances. Certainly, for text-only, online discourse, race is not going to be a differentiator.
But, AmiMoJo, you bring up a very interesting point: What if this had all happened in a virtual world, with avatars? What if the two Jasons were identical in every other way, except for the color they had chosen for their avatars? Would it be so wrong to call one of them "red Jason", and the other "green Jason"?
sig: sauer
Sherman and Grant both won battles, but Grant had much more difficult fights to win. Vicksburg was tough.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
The slavery is one aspect, yes. You can call the duel fair game, but his actions during that duel put a stain on his honor, at the time. He also killed many native americans. As a General, he ordered his troops to attack the villages of women and children, rather than engage the fighters. He was the one giving the orders. When he was president, he pushed his own legislation of the indian removal act, got it through congress and signed it. He was the driving force behind the trail of tears, which is considered by many as one of the darkest episodes in American history. I realize the perils of judging historical figures, and comparing what is acceptable today, versus the realities they dealt with. I'm just pointing out that a lot of the other faces who grace currency are less controversial, which is why he is the obvious choice to remove. Hell, he hated the idea of centralized banks, and probably wouldn't want to be the face on something which he opposed.
It's also the most easily recognized and readily accepted currency around the world. Start changing it's appearance drastically and or frequently and that quality will diminish as small businesses around the world won't be as willing to take a currency they don't readily recognize due to its' uniform and long standing look and feel.
It works everywhere because it doesn't change dramatically in look and feel and is universally recognized.
I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
Never heard of Harriet Tubman before this announcement. Having read the Wikipedia write-up, I know a bit about her life. All the things she did about being a Union Spy and smuggling slaves across the border are commendable. But why was it absolutely necessary to put a black woman on a bill? For those totally committed to political correctness, this may sound blasphemous to ask, but stop and think. Why insist upon it?
It's not because Harriet Tubman represents anything bad. No. But Martin Luther King represented great things. I've read his biographies. He said and did wonderful things. One of his best known was when He said He looked forward to a day when a person would not be judged by the color of their skin. But when other politically correct people use his example, it seems to be to defend some something like welfare, which has done more to keep poor people poor than almost anything else. MLK would not have supported welfare. And once Harriet Tubman gets on a bill, it will be the same way. They will use her on the bill in ways She herself would never have supported. And next, why not insist on Caitlen Jenner, or someone like that on the next bill. After all, we have to insist that people look at that example too. That is how proper citizens must think! We should think that is a normal and healthy thing to do.
Please. The men who are on those bills right now represent for many the idea of individual rights and freedoms. All true rights from God are individual freedoms - not group freedoms. Andrew Jackson, though not an original founder, helped individual freedoms because he helped this country's citizens maintain financial freedom. He survived two assassination attempts and eliminated the national bank of that time to bring the country out of debt. Isn't that an appropriate reason to have him on a bill? He endured danger on his life yet he stayed the course in that area. He may not have been perfect. No doubt. But I would keep his picture and eliminate Hamilton long before Jackson. Hamilton, though he had great strengths often wavered on principles of freedom in his later life. He also originally set up the first National bank which caused high inflation rates causing many to become poor. Study some real history and check it out. Wish our present day politicians had his guts.
There are those who feel questioning the wisdom of our "wise overlords" in changing the picture on the $20 bill is upsetting. It is my strong sincere belief there are better venues for promoting the accomplishments of Harriet Tubman's life than putting her on the $20 bill. I think her life's accomplishments will be twisted as much or more than MLK's to promote politically correct policies that neither of them would have supported during their lives. Sure, you can say my argument is moot since congress has approved it. But if people start rejecting the $20 bill, it will become like the wandering $1 coin. For years, it moved from one woman to another, not able to find one people really liked or that citizens approved of. Congress may approve, but in the end, the people can nullify by "refuse to use".
Never heard of Harriet Tubman before this announcement. Having read the Wikipedia write-up, I know a bit about her life. All the things she did about being a Union Spy and smuggling slaves across the border are commendable. But why was it absolutely necessary to put a black woman on a bill? For those totally committed to political correctness, this may sound blasphemous to ask, but stop and think. Why insist upon it?
It's not because Harriet Tubman represents anything bad. No. But Martin Luther King represented great things. I've read his biographies. He said and did wonderful things. One of his best known was when He said He looked forward to a day when a person would not be judged by the color of their skin. But when other politically correct people use his example, it seems to be to defend some something like welfare, which has done more to keep poor people poor than almost anything else. MLK would not have supported welfare. And once Harriet Tubman gets on a bill, it will be the same way. They will use her on the bill in ways She herself would never have supported. And next, why not insist on Caitlen Jenner, or someone like that on the next bill. After all, we have to insist that people look at that example too. That is how proper citizens must think! We should think that is a normal and healthy thing to do.
Please. The men who are on those bills right now represent for many the idea of individual rights and freedoms. All true rights from God are individual freedoms - not group freedoms. Andrew Jackson, though not an original founder, helped individual freedoms because he helped this country's citizens maintain financial freedom. He survived two assassination attempts and eliminated the national bank of that time to bring the country out of debt. Isn't that an appropriate reason to have him on a bill? He endured danger on his life yet he stayed the course in that area. He may not have been perfect. No doubt. But I would keep his picture and eliminate Hamilton long before Jackson. Hamilton, though he had great strengths often wavered on principles of freedom in his later life. He also originally set up the first National bank which caused high inflation rates causing many to become poor. Study some real history and check it out. Wish our present day politicians had his guts.
There are those who feel questioning the wisdom of our "wise overlords" in changing the picture on the $20 bill is upsetting. It is my strong sincere belief there are better venues for promoting the accomplishments of Harriet Tubman's life than putting her on the $20 bill. I think her life's accomplishments will be twisted as much or more than MLK's to promote politically correct policies that neither of them would have supported during their lives. Sure, you can say my argument is moot since congress has approved it. But if people start rejecting the $20 bill, it will become like the wandering $1 coin. For years, it moved from one woman to another, not able to find one people really liked or that citizens approved of. Congress may approve, but in the end, the people can nullify by "refuse to use".
- This comment seems to disappear as soon as I post it - so I'm posting it until the editors quit deleting it.
Never heard of Harriet Tubman before this announcement. Having read the Wikipedia write-up, I know a bit about her life. All the things she did about being a Union Spy and smuggling slaves across the border are commendable. But why was it absolutely necessary to put a black woman on a bill? For those totally committed to political correctness, this may sound blasphemous to ask, but stop and think. Why insist upon it?
It's not because Harriet Tubman represents anything bad. No. But Martin Luther King represented great things. I've read his biographies. He said and did wonderful things. One of his best known was when He said He looked forward to a day when a person would not be judged by the color of their skin. But when other politically correct people use his example, it seems to be to defend some something like welfare, which has done more to keep poor people poor than almost anything else. MLK would not have supported welfare. And once Harriet Tubman gets on a bill, it will be the same way. They will use her on the bill in ways She herself would never have supported. And next, why not insist on Caitlen Jenner, or someone like that on the next bill. After all, we have to insist that people look at that example too. That is how proper citizens must think! We should think that is a normal and healthy thing to do.
Please. The men who are on those bills right now represent for many the idea of individual rights and freedoms. All true rights from God are individual freedoms - not group freedoms. Andrew Jackson, though not an original founder, helped individual freedoms because he helped this country's citizens maintain financial freedom. He survived two assassination attempts and eliminated the national bank of that time to bring the country out of debt. Isn't that an appropriate reason to have him on a bill? He endured danger on his life yet he stayed the course in that area. He may not have been perfect. No doubt. But I would keep his picture and eliminate Hamilton long before Jackson. Hamilton, though he had great strengths often wavered on principles of freedom in his later life. He also originally set up the first National bank which caused high inflation rates causing many to become poor. Study some real history and check it out. Wish our present day politicians had his guts.
There are those who feel questioning the wisdom of our "wise overlords" in changing the picture on the $20 bill is upsetting. It is my strong sincere belief there are better venues for promoting the accomplishments of Harriet Tubman's life than putting her on the $20 bill. I think her life's accomplishments will be twisted as much or more than MLK's to promote politically correct policies that neither of them would have supported during their lives. Sure, you can say my argument is moot since congress has approved it. But if people start rejecting the $20 bill, it will become like the wandering $1 coin. For years, it moved from one woman to another, not able to find one people really liked or that citizens approved of. Congress may approve, but in the end, the people can nullify by "refuse to use".
Odd, given that it was white men who ended slavery, forcefully, across the world.
Sure, but Andrew Jackson was not one of the people working to end slavery. He was working to extend and deepen it. He also deprived thousands of Native American citizens of their rights (and for many, their lives) in defiance of Supreme Court rulings. No president did more to undermine justice and the rule of law. He belongs on the $20 bill as much as Mussolini belongs on the 20 euro bill (I was going to compare him to Hitler, but I didn't want to Godwin the discussion).
/. used to be a tech site - I get too much news already - just too many of these stories - political clickbate that at this point is just more noise to deal with.
Slashdot has always had political stories. It was, afterall Rob Malda's blog before such things were called blogs, and politics was of interest to him. You might not like it, but simply rewriting history to match your wishes is not helpful.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
"This ain't about race. If I'm on the bottom and you're on the bottom, we are the same color; dirt fuckin' poor.
Maybe some of you have noticed - if you post comments that are politically incorrect, they are often deleted soon afterwards.
What I don't understand is why they didn't just come up with another denomination. It's like they're more interested in punishing or taking from others than accomplishing something new. Just another step in the plan to ultimately rob us of physical money by thoroughly ruining it with stupidity first.
I wasn't disagreeing with you about mentioning someone's race. It's fine in some situations, it really depends on the context.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Well, if you let him punch you in the face for an hour, you're the idiot.
So? I wasn't commenting on Jackson, I was commenting on irving47's racist rant.
Well, Europeans did the smart thing for once and didn't put any people on euro bills. And the US should do the same.
(And if we are going to put people on money, it should be American scientists and engineers, not activists and politicians, no matter how worthy their cause.)
We're replacing the racist founder of the Democratic Party with a gun-toting Christian Republican. I like it.
i'd prefer hamilton stay than jackson. jackson always seemed like kind of a dick. and hamilton like someone who could have gone on to do some even better things if not for getting shot.
To me, racial background of a person is not important - what is important is the content inside - the personality
This is exactly as it should be. MLK Jr. himself made his famous statement that people should be judged by the content of their character instead of the color of their skin. He must be spinning in his grave like a gyroscope to see how racial identity politics have evolved since his assassination, where the biggest character assassinations these days come from blacks against whites, along with self-hating whites who have some strange need to feel guilty for being white. Same thing goes for males vs. females and straight vs. gay. Basically, if you're a straight, white male, everyone has free reign to hate on you, make fun of you, condescend to you, and blame you for everything that's wrong with anyone that isn't a straight, white male. You have no right to complain, and if you object it's just proof that you're a racist, sexist, homophobic idiot. There is no valid argument you can use to defend your innocence of these charges, and any attempt to do so will just result in you being shouted down and called part of the problem.
What kind of crap is this? I don't understand!
It's called "political correctness" and it's been running rampant for the last 20 years or so. George Orwell would be proud of how liberals have followed his examples of doublespeak.
... you're describing the light that reflects off them, and not their intrinsic pigmentation.
the pigment of my pen is blue, so blue light predominantly reflects off it and it absorbs most of the rest of the spectrum. it's how humanity has chosen to classify you know, color.
attempts at rebalancing a society that is still institutionally stacked against certain groups of people.
See, this is the part I have to question. Historically, blacks aren't the only racial, national, or religious group to be stacked against. Chinese were imported by the tends of thousands as "coolies" to build railroads, working in conditions that made slavery look placid by comparison. Irish immigrants were denied jobs, housing, taken advantage of left and right, and preyed upon by police. Catholics were persecuted nationally for a very long time. The list goes on and on. Blacks do not, have not, and will not get a monopoly on victim status.
Yet if you look around, how many Chinese do you see languishing in ghettos? How many Irish do you find in prison? Shall I go on? It seems odd that many other racial and ethnic groups which suffered mightily due to discrimination and indentured servitude are doing fine today, and that without massive government intervention on their behalf. Why is that, I wonder?
Here's a hypothesis: blacks, as a cultural unit, are suffering because they've been given special treatment by government. When someone tells you your problems are not of your own making, that someone else forced them on you, it provides immediate gratification and removes any desire to change your own destructive habits. Instead you become a "hey, it's not my fault I'm out of work, no high school diploma, with a criminal record, and five kids by five different mothers. It's society's fault!" Couple this with a strong anti-achievement bias in the black community -- excelling at school is called "acting white" and gets you treated like a traitor to your race -- and you have a perfect scenario for an entire racial group to achieve and maintain permanent victim status.
This is no accident. Democrats position themselves as the party of choice for blacks, but what exactly have they done for blacks in the last 50 years? Black unemployment is higher. Unwed mothers are higher. Abortions are higher. Black on black crime is higher. Black life expectancy is lower. And yet their message remains the same every election cycle: you must vote Democrat, otherwise the Republicans will put you back in chains picking cotton for the masters.
The true "masters" here are the Democrats. They have a vested political and economic interest in keeping blacks "on the plantation" and feeling like victims. It keeps them voting Democrat year after year. In truth they could give a shit about the plight of blacks. They don't want blacks to succeed, for if black did, the Democrats would no longer be able to wave the race card around to guarantee black votes.
Wake up folks. It's a scam. It's been a scam for decades.
An interesting argument, but I think it's accepted more for its inherent value than for its stable appearance.
I don't doubt that a stable appearance contributes some intangible value, but bills like the $100 have changed significantly in the past 10-20 years without much impact on their value outside the US.
I'd also guess that a lot of the US currency outside of major western population centers (ie, traded on black markets or used in shadow economies) are old bills and any new money designs would take a decade to get into wide foreign circulation.
Plus a currency that doesn't change periodically becomes much easier for counterfeiters to duplicate, especially overseas where counterfeit detection is lower tech. Anti-counterfeiting designs using polymers or other hard to duplicate mediums besides rag paper would greatly inhibit counterfeiting.
So why not refer to their actions specifically, instead of opting to create an Emmanuel Goldstein?
The treasury should just get it ovwith and place Mickey Mouse on each and every bill. Just sayin' Sidney
Who really cares though? Does anyone have such a connection to Jackson or Hamilton to care about their ouster?
Actually yes. Native Americans. I read through the threads and I don't see any about this. Andrew Jackson brought on the greatest genocide against the Native people of the Southeast. It is called The Trail of Tears. Yes even today Andrew Jackson is still hated today. Some Native people still refuse to accept $20 bills for this reason and yes even I cringe when I see his photo. When I see his photo today on the 20 I am reminded that my People are still held under seige. So he owned over 300 slaves. At least they lived. Over 80,000 Native Americans including 27 members of my family DIED by his hands and his orders. His actions taught Hilter how to "handle" his Jewish problem. Yes Jackson was a mass murder and the US glorified this with his photo on the 20.
Since my Son was small I have taught him his own personal history. The story handed down though my family about the night the soldiers came. How they bayoneted my Grandfather in his home protecting his Grandchildren. Herded them up like cattle and held them in a Concentration Camp and then made them walk to Oklahoma where all but one of them died.
Once in a store when he was small and I was paying for things with a 20 he asked. "Why is that man's picture on the money? At school they said GREAT men's pictures are on the money?" How do you answer a question like that knowing what he did to your family? I had to explain that the US isn't that great and he and I are still held captive by the US government.
So yes there are people still effected by having his photo on our money. I am glad to see it go. I also wish history on schools would be rewritten to show him to be the mass murder that he was. Of course the "Land of the Free" isn't going to show or expose the murder and rape it is guilty of. Indian People are not extinct.
WE ARE STILL HERE!
Native America
Fighting Terrorism Since 1492
I once got the chance to piss on the bastards grave. It really felt good. Here's one for Grandpa.
They were afraid they would vote for Donald Trump...
It's very easy to use the most visible difference. "Wheelchair Jason" might also be "Smart-ass Jason", but the chair is more visible. Likewise for "Black Jason", unless he's in a wheelchair, in which case the latter is what might get focused on.
Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
Who really cares though? Does anyone have such a connection to Jackson or Hamilton to care about their ouster?
Actually yes there is. I do. I'm Cherokee. I read all the threads and only saw one about this and a lot about him being a slave owner. Sure he owned 300 slaves. They got to live. Maybe as slaves but they still lived and had worth. Jackson also KILLED over 80,000 Native Americans 40,000 were Cherokees. We call it the "Trail of Tears". He was even known and ran for President as the "Indian Killer". Even today a lot of Cherokee people will not accept $20 bills. In Oklahoma some ATM machines give out $10 bills for this reason. He even taught Hilter what to do about his Jewish problem. ( Yes the concept of Concentration Camps and genocide came from Jackson) The first Concentration Camp ever was built in Georgia here in the US not in Germany.
I taught my Son the history of his family since he was young. About the night the soldiers came and bayoneted his Grandfather in his own home trying to protect his Grandchildren. How the rest of his family was herded like cattle to a Concentration Camp and then sent to Oklahoma were all but one of his family died on that trail.
Once when he was young we were in a store I was paying for the stuff with a 20. He asked "Why is that man's picture on the money. In school they said that great men's pictures were on the money." Its hard to explain to a child that he is still held captive and his families murder is held in high regards in the "Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave".
So yes there are still people affected by having this Mass Murders photo on the money. He is still hated and every time I see his face on the 20 I am reminded of what happened. History is truly written by the victors.
WE ARE STILL HERE!
Native America
Fighting Terrorism Since 1492
I once got the chance to piss on Jackson's grave. It sure felt good. Here's one for Grandpa.
The pigment in your pen reflects blue light, but absorbs a different color (most likely yellow, or several different colors that aren't blue).
IC3 male, obviously
Sherman is a bit contentious but likely so would any other Civil War general except for Grant. I would put Robert E. Lee as probably a bit more acceptable than Sherman.
If you wanted a general I would recommend Matthew Ridgway.
"Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
The sheer fact that you're here in this thread bitching about it shows your racism. People who truly don't give a shit about racism don't bother to argue stuff like this. They move the hell on.
Why? WHY? You've got to be shitting me! Don't sit there acting like you don't know. United States 2008. Were you there? Those rich fucks shat all over our economy causing the Great Depression 2.0. Many of us only lost our jobs, our homes, and our pensions if we were lucky. What did they lose? Not a god damned thing! They got us taxpayers who they just fucked over to cover their losses, popped their golden parachutes, and laughed all the way to the bank. I don't care if they're 100% liberal (even though contrary to your claim we know they are almost exclusively conservatives), these fuckers need to pay. The better question is why do you defend them. Your 80k ain't shit! I make more than that and likely live in a cheaper place than you. I am not rich. You're not rich, you're in the same sinking boat the rest of us are. Licking massa's boots ain't gonna make you rich either.
"Listen, doll. That's 'cause they're all about where people come from. The only thing that's important is where someone's going."
Sometimes we look for sense where it isn't there to be found.
Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
"Civil rights era leaders will reportedly be depicted in the new $5 bill."
I know it's not the same era, but isn't Abraham Lincoln generally considered part of the whole cival rights movement with the whole emancipation proclamation.
What a ridiculous puddle of vomit you just spewed everywhere! I've heard fake moon landing stories that made more sense and had more credibility. Excuse your racism anyway you want but it's still racism.
Well aren't you just a racist, sexist, homophobic idiot! Come on, don't be a pussy. Just admit it.
Better than "Igneous Americans"
Better than "Igneous Americans"!
This will be the ugliest portrait of a woman on a bill ever.
How dare they change money without polling the public first.
This is OUR money. We dont want some unknown ugly bitch on it.
I grew up in Detroit. You know the place with the largest Arab population outside of the Middle East.....I grew up with Arabs of all kinds, both Christian and Muslim. Detroit has a significant cultural communities including Black, Greek (Greektown), Polish (Hamtramack), German, Slavs, Arabs (Royal Oak, Dearborn) and Italian. I hung out with everyone.
Good-bye
Thankfully Bitcoin has no stupid pictures.
One of MANY problems solved by digital currencies.
See, this is the part I have to question. Historically, blacks aren't the only racial, national, or religious group to be stacked against. Chinese were imported by the tends of thousands as "coolies" to build railroads, working in conditions that made slavery look placid by comparison. Irish immigrants were denied jobs, housing, taken advantage of left and right, and preyed upon by police. Catholics were persecuted nationally for a very long time. The list goes on and on. Blacks do not, have not, and will not get a monopoly on victim status.
Much of what you say is true to some extent, but I think one crucial difference is that black slaves were imported in huge numbers, treated with callous cruelty in many cases, regarded as no more than chattel with a lower rank than some domestic animals. I suppose it added to the problem that when they were freed, the whole situation was grossly mishandled by the winners of the civil war, and the previous, white masters felt severely aggrieved - something that still persists to this day. And, of course, a black person can't simply "fade into the foreground" like most immigrants of European origin; how much of a chance would any white person have given to a black person at that time? Even now the racial tolerance we are proud of is only superficial - it is still all too common to meet attitudes like "I don't mind blacks, but I wouldn't want my daughter to marry one".
Here's a hypothesis: blacks, as a cultural unit, are suffering because they've been given special treatment by government. When someone tells you your problems are not of your own making, that someone else forced them on you, it provides immediate gratification and removes any desire to change your own destructive habits. Instead you become a "hey, it's not my fault I'm out of work, no high school diploma, with a criminal record, and five kids by five different mothers. It's society's fault!" Couple this with a strong anti-achievement bias in the black community -- excelling at school is called "acting white" and gets you treated like a traitor to your race -- and you have a perfect scenario for an entire racial group to achieve and maintain permanent victim status.
Again, some of your observations are not all wrong - when people, as individuals or as a group, are not living up to their objective potential, they need something to motivate them to achieve more, and removing barriers is only one part in that picture. Somebody also has to make reasonable demands of them, because your confidence in yourself and in your place in society grows from overcoming difficulties; this is clearly something we as a society haven't been good enough at. I think the anti-achievement bias is not limited to black communities - it is what Terry Pratchett calls 'the crab bucket': if you observe a bucket full of crabs, you will see that maybe one of them starts climbing out, but then the others grab hold of it and pull it back down. I grew up with that in Denmark, out in the countryside - if you are clever at school, you are met with "you think you are better than us?" and that sort of thing - it is called "The Law of Jante": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.... It is something that arises in small communities that are faced with a constant struggle to make a living - your very outlook on life becomes one that relies heavily on never questioning the tradition, because there is no surplus for experimenting with newfangled nonsense.
This old trope again? Really?
Tell you what... when you can explain the voting record on the 1965 Civil Rights Act, the continued paternalistic racism of most 'progressive' policies on race, and the well-into-the-21st-century presence of KKK Grand Wizard Richard Byrd in the US Senate (D-WV)? Then we can talk about your myth being more than just a myth. ;)
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
Why the fuck are we demonizing anybody who makes a lot of money?
Occupy was never a single group of people with a single agenda. Nonetheless, one of the key complaints wasn't that there were people who had a lot of money, but the fact that people in that position can buy corrupt influence over democracy. The "99%" bore the brunt of the pain and suffering caused by the financial crisis of 2007-2009. None of the "1%" were prosecuted.
Of course every left-wing organisation with a random thought climbed under the umbrella too. It's an interesting parallel to what happened to the Tea Party, which started with complaints such as that the US government was borrowing money to bail out banks, and ended up as a corporate tool and private power trip for kooky right-wing politicians.
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
.... because she got hot sauce in her bag, fo' shizzle.
No, it'll read "had constitution it was never able to live up to, was bought out by special interests and complicit media, turned into oligarchy, hey, how about those Kardashians?"
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
The currency needs a whole new design, period. More color, translucent holograms, clear windows,etc. American currency is ridiculously old fashioned and the Federalist design style is too stuffy. And any redesign should involve regular refreshes of featured items, whether it's people or natural wonders or engineering achievements.
Using hard currency itself needs change. But if we are to have something material representing value, then it should be disability-friendly. Australia, with a durable material and different sizes, seems to have the best. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
(||) Nehmo (||)
Ok, how about: Black? No, that's also racist and denigrating, since black is sometimes poetically associated with evil. Negro? No, that's too close to that other word. Afro-American? Definitely not. It's lazy, and assumes a particular hair style. African American? Maybe, but aren't we then excluding Haitians and Jamaicans, among others? Nubian? Ok, sounds cool, but WTF does that even mean? Colored? NO! Hearkens back to the fifties with segregated drinking fountains and toilets. People of Color? Don't ALL people have color?...
The AA problem never occured to me. Let's say an Australian Aborigine came to the US. What would you call them?
(||) Nehmo (||)
Bullshit. It will be Bono and Al Gore because of the environment and stuff.
The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
Australia was exactly what I have in mind. I have a 5 dollar Australian note that was given to me by a wife's coworker (he lost a joke bet and paid off in 5 "dollars" I can't spend).
The coloration is great and the material feels kind of like Tyvek. I use it as a bookmark since changing it would be a waste of time and money. Currency works well as a bookmark and I'm actually thinking of buying a batch of worthless/obsolete currency for this purpose. I only recently found a place that sells it in bulk.
You'd think that pre-Euro currency or other devalued or obsolete currencies with high levels of circulation would be kind of easy to find, but I could only find one place selling them. It's easier to find collectible rare currency than obsolete currency for some reason.