Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Mr. Rogers sued the KKK (2021)

allthatsinteresting.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 117 posts

Re: Mr. Rogers sued the KKK (2021)

#91

Post by troxy1 »

commandlinefan wrote: post #57
michaelchisari wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The documentary "Won't You Be My Neighbor" was even better than the movie, highly recommend it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FhwktRDG_aQ

The scene (actual video footage) of him testifying in front of congress was so amazing I wouldn’t have believed it actually happened if I saw it in a dramatized movie. I tried to find a clip on YouTube but I can’t - it’s worth watching this documentary if only to watch him actually convince a skeptical senator to fund PBS.

Someone linked the youtube clip of the testifying before congress down below.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-C5PMPIdG_Y

Re: Mr. Rogers sued the KKK (2021)

#92

Post by jamiek88 »

b112 wrote: post #90
crooked-v wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure many people who took part in historical lynchings against minorities thought themselves absolutely justified and were having a grand ol' time doing it. If you look up the records, you'll find that some lynchings were even treated as spontaneous parties by the aggressors: they broke out the good booze, started up some campfire cooking, danced and played music... all while their targets hung dead in the backgr…

You are now discussing an entirely different thibg, I therefore presume you had no valid response to my prior comment.

Your comments about this are just plain boring when we see the injustice around us every single day.

We don’t want to lean back in our comfort and pontificate from our position of privilege and safety and ‘well, akchtually’ people who experience these acts of hate and violence.

Teaching and believing and spreading that some people are inferior because of where they were born or the color of their skin is just plain wrong. If you are telling your kids that, it isn’t an opinion, it’s hate.

It isn’t a position that deserves debate, conversation or any space in our polities.

Tolerance has it’s limits and a lot of people are tired and refusing to tolerate the likes of your juvenile, puerile attempts at ‘conversation’.

Re: Mr. Rogers sued the KKK (2021)

#93

Post by shadowgovt »

anonymousiam wrote: post #74
shadowgovt wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When Fred Rogers shared a wading pool with François Clemmons, public pools had been legally desegregated for only five years. The underlying stigma that had justified the segregation (the notion that black people were dirty or dangerous) hadn't gone away with the passing of the law. Fred made the conscious decision to demonstrate to his viewers, on his show, that the messages some of them would be receiving from pare…

Okay, so your indirect answer to my question is, Fred Rogers was practicing the anti-racism of 1970. Super! The article (published last year) does not make that distinction, and it seems like a disingenuous attempt to legitimize modern anti-racism by conflating it with the past version.

You didn't ask about modern anti-racism; you asked "Which version of anti-racisim did Mr. Rogers embrace?"

Re: Mr. Rogers sued the KKK (2021)

#94

Post by shadowgovt »

halostatue wrote: post #76
anonymousiam wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please elaborate on what it is that I do not understand. Which version of anti-racisim did Mr. Rogers embrace? https://www.newsweek.com/real-problem-critical-race-theory-o...

The right-wing abomination known as "critical race theory", as described in that Newsweek article, is that it has absolutely no connection to what real anti-racism is. The anti-CRT people—let’s call them what they really are, pro-racists—have created something from whole cloth that allows them to raise lots of money and outrage. The two privileged white authors of the opinion piece are disingenuous, at best, as what…

It's an interesting article because you rarely see the counter-position spelled out so clearly.

"""The CRT-approved story, in a nutshell, is that white racism is pervasive and accounts for all racial deficits and disparities. What is not being taught—what students are not exposed to, and not even allowed to hear—is the contrary position that persistent racial inequalities are oftentimes rooted in cultural differences and behavioral tendencies that are not all traceable to slavery or Jim Crow, and cannot all be solved by purging the vague category of "structural racism." """

... In other words, "The problem with CRT is it banishes the alternative explanation that races are different." In other words, anti-racism's problem is it's... Anti-racist, and doesn't give racism a seat at the table. Well, yes. We already had this argument two generations ago.

(And that's if I accept the authors' premise that CRT and anti-racism are the same thing, which they are not. CRT is a specific legal interpretation framework; the term is mis-applied to race-conscious general education).

Re: Mr. Rogers sued the KKK (2021)

#95

Post by b112 »

jamiek88 wrote: post #92
b112 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are now discussing an entirely different thibg, I therefore presume you had no valid response to my prior comment.

Your comments about this are just plain boring when we see the injustice around us every single day. We don’t want to lean back in our comfort and pontificate from our position of privilege and safety and ‘well, akchtually’ people who experience these acts of hate and violence. Teaching and believing and spreading that some people are inferior because of where they were born or the color of their skin is just plain w…

My prior comments discussed zero acts of violence, and further, you are pontificating the second you reply to anything on hackernews.

People here have been discussing how to teach people about equality, how to resolve racism in the young. My comment was about ensuring that is targeted correctly, both in youth and older people, so it actually works.

You cannot fix something, if you target the wrong thing to fix. You cannot fix something, if you don't even understand the source of the issue.

But sure... yell at the guy trying to rationally frame this issue, so we can correctly fix it.

That makes sense.

Re: Mr. Rogers sued the KKK (2021)

#96

Post by bitwize »

normac2 wrote: post #31
hinkley wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Before the #MeToo movement there was a slow ramp of scandals about celebrities and for a while there every time someone posted about Fred I would recite a little litany in my head, Pleasebegoodpleasebegoodpleasebegood That went into overdrive after the first rumors about Bill Cosby started up. And then by John Lassiter I was a momentary wreck every time Fred made the news. Fred Rogers has been gone long enough now th…

Relevant xkcd: https://xkcd.com/767/

Fred's family maintains that when he was annoyed, he would express it... in a Lady Elaine voice.

Re: Mr. Rogers sued the KKK (2021)

#97

Post by bitwize »

UberFly wrote: post #63

Of all the people that are deified after their death, Fred Rodgers really seems to be worthy of it.

I've said for years that Fred Rogers actually put into practice the values that Christians claim to espouse. Just about all of them. In kind of an innocent way, too, like Jesus was kind to the most hated people in his society, we are told it is a good thing to do, so why shouldn't I do it as well?

Re: Mr. Rogers sued the KKK (2021)

#98

Post by jollybean »

lupire wrote: post #9
jollybean wrote: post #8

I wonder if it'd be better to posit that the 'team' sued the KKK because almost everything I know about this guy would lead me to believe he wasn't even likely to attack his aggressors, even if it was reasonable to do so. FYI check out this 1969 congressional hearing [1], especially as compared to hearings today. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-C5PMPIdG_Y

Asserting one's rights is not "attacking". Do you think that Fred Rogers, upon learning that a gang of monstrous people is saying horrific things while impersonating him, wouldn't force them to stop?

Yes.

First - this is the kind of thing that's typically handled and driven by 'the legal department'. They think differently, act differently, for non obvious reasons.

Second - 'fighting' is a form of aggression no doubt and suggest most people avoid that and confrontation esp. people like Rogers. I can see him rationalizing it's just not worth the effort, I mean, it depends a lot on the proportionality of the situation. Was someone handing out leaflets in 'nowhere USA'? Or was there a National Convention?

I cans see Rogers wanting to do something like wanting to call them and talk to them, and his lawyers saying 'no, that's not how it works, better to send them a firm letter from a reputable law firm, we'll take care of it' etc..

Re: Mr. Rogers sued the KKK (2021)

#99

Post by senectus1 »

bentley wrote: post #87
rufus_foreman wrote: post #82

The guy had a dark side too, https://c.tenor.com/wW881hjc4swAAAAd/gif.gif .

Full context: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hmpz4uOGjGU

wow that really changes the context...

interesting that it didn't seem to affect him at all given the context of the prudishness of that age.

I wonder "when" flipping the bird suddenly become mainstream rude?

Re: Mr. Rogers sued the KKK (2021)

#100

Post by slater »

senectus1 wrote: post #99
bentley wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Full context: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hmpz4uOGjGU

wow that really changes the context... interesting that it didn't seem to affect him at all given the context of the prudishness of that age. I wonder "when" flipping the bird suddenly become mainstream rude?

Shortly after various battles featuring British archers, I'd suppose.

(yes, likely not entirely true)

Post reply on HN