How tragic that public history is being torn down!! Will the Jefferson Memorial be next since Jefferson Never freed his slaves?
ALL human leaders in the past failed morally in many ways, as do we now!
But some human leaders, despite their moral failures, we still honor with statues because of their GOOD actions they did!
The statue of Gaspar de Portola, the Spanish explorer, at Pacifica was just torn down by Cal Trans!!
https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/statue-removed-in-pacifica-gaspar-de-portola-18615209.php?utm_campaign=CMS%20Sharing%20Tools%20(Premium)&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=referral&fbclid=IwAR2DP0oVMDGKvggnZz9vp0C7505BTfqxebngy-VFXstKC73_6htJiBn4j1k
The statue of Spanish military officer Gaspar de Portola, which stood near the Pacifica Community Center for more than 30 years, started drawing attention in the summer of 2020, as discussions about racial justice and the legacies of colonization reached a boiling point across the nation.
In the late 1760s, Portola led a Spanish fleet along the California coast, including by the San Francisco Bay, and is credited with sparking settlements in the area that ultimately displaced Indigenous inhabitants.
Bob n' Renee via Wiki Commons; Illustration via SFGATE
In mid-2020, a petition calling for the statue’s removal — which read, in part, that the “colonialism, racism and patriarchy this statue represents has no place in the City of Pacifica” — gained nearly 5,000 signatures. Meanwhile, other statues of historical figures, including Christopher Columbus, Ulysses S. Grant and Junipero Serra, were being toppled across the Bay Area, either officially or by protesters.
And, even William Penn's statue was to be removed by the National Park Service from Philadelphia this month, but enough people objected so that is uncertain now.
Matt Rourke/AP
YET William Penn paid the Native Americans for his landgrant of Pennsylvania (granted to him by the King). And he and his followers defended innocent Native Americans from racist-invaders such as the Scotch-Irish who masssacred innocent Native civilians!
Portola's statue’s "confiscation, done without ceremony a little after 9 a.m. on Thursday, was first reported by the Pacifica Tribune."
January 18, 2024
In the Light of the Good, the Just, the Kind,
and the actual facts of history, not the ideological distortions!
Dan Wilcox
Musings on Ultimate Reality, ethics, religion, social history, literature, media, and art
Showing posts with label enslavement. Show all posts
Showing posts with label enslavement. Show all posts
Friday, January 19, 2024
Monday, November 22, 2021
Wokeness to 'Systemic Racism" and Original Sin--2 false ideological claims
Randal Rauser, a systematic theologian, claims:
“Personally, I struggle with all sorts of impulses to be prejudiced against other people. This is a manifestation of the more general struggle with sin and the fallen human nature. Day by day, I need to seek and call out my own internal fallen impulses to otherize and dehumanize my fellow human beings.
"Wokeness is at its best not as a punctiliar moment of revelation equivalent to the old Methodist perfectionism but rather an invitation to examine oneself and become woke every day to one’s own sin and wickedness including in the area of race.”
-Randal Rauser, Canadian Systematic Theologian at Taylor Seminary.
https://randalrauser.com/2021/11/a-review-of-owen-strachans-debate-performance-on-unbelievable/
Rauser appears to defend the claim that systemic racism exists at present in the United States even though it isn’t as bad as during Jim Crow and antebellum slavery.
While I agree that in some places and among some individuals overt racism does still exist. I think that the claim there is “systemic racism” in all of the U.S. is not only untrue, but is an ideological falsehood of the worst sort.
A number of Black scholars including Thomas Sowell, Professor of Economics, author of A Conflict of Visions and Walter Williams, Distinguished Professor of Economics at George Mason University have emphasized that while some racism does exist and needs to be strongly opposed, “systemic racism” doesn’t exist in present day America.
I do agree with Rauser that each of us do need to regularly check his/herself see whether or not we are being biased against others because of race, sex, class or nationality.
However, I don’t agree that all Americans and Canadians “struggle with all sorts of impulses to be prejudiced against other people” because of “sin and the fallen human nature.”
Unlike Rauser, I don’t believe in the creedal doctrine of Original Sin, don’t think humans are born sinful, totally depraved, “in essence, evil” because of Adam’s eating a fruit, like the vast majority of Christians do.
Original Sin or Systemic Racism of Whiteness and similar ideological claims have no basis in reality.
1. Geneticists seems to have demonstrated that there never were 2 humans 6,000 years ago who were the origin of all the billions of humans today. Instead, the evidence so far indicates that all of humankind came from a few thousand individuals in existence many thousadns of years ago.
2. Original Sin is a pernicious doctrine that claims what the alleged wrong the ancestor of all humans did thousands of years ago was innately transferred to each infant of him and down to each grandchild, great-grantchild, etc. This total depravity, sinfulness is so innate within human nature every infant upon conception and birth has this sinfulness within them, unable to overcome it. Indeed, according to this doctrine, even good actions by each of us, are actually sinful!! A wrong action by another person, even if it was by our parent can't be innately inserted within us as children because we are their children.
Even if such a biological claim could be possible (which it isn't), that would be utterly evil, to blame a child, even a day-old infant for what wrong-doing his parent did.
This strange doctrine of Christianity also demeans the Creator. A good Creator would never insert utter sinfulness into each new human infant, no matter how sinful his/her father was.
Original Sin is also a denial of human choice, creativity, ability, and inherent worth.
Etc.
This new ideological claim of "woke" humans, that whites are guilty of systematic racism stereotypes unique individuals based upon such a superficiality as skin color. It's claim all humans with white skin are racists is very untrue, unfair, and delusionary.
Woke believers ought to read a good scholarly book on genetics. Geneticists have discovered that there is more variation within some racial groupings than there is between 2 different racial groups!
Furthermore, such a claim is contrary to the history of humankind. Racism isn't unique to one racial grouping. It appears in various contexts among all human groups.
While European whites, especially the
British, were mostly racist against Blacks in North America and Africa in the past, other races and nationalities in different times were also given to prejudice.
In the last 30 years, in Zimbabwe, for instance, there is clear evidence of racial prejudice against whites. And in China for centuries there was prejudice against anyone who wasn't Chinese.
Japanese have been very prejudiced against non-Japanese.
In history, North Africans enslaved over a million white Europeans over a period of 300 years!
There was plenty of prejudice, abuse, and enslavement in the Americas before whites ever showed up here. Various native American groups treated other native groups unfairly, even massacred the "other."
Instead, of prejudice and racism being something unique about humans with white skin, humans generally are given to IN GROUP VERSUS OUT GROUP bias, and to unfair treatment toward others, regardless of the color of skin in particular.
We all can fall for the will to power, the temptation to generalize and stereotype, etc. For example, BLM leaders often did it on their website in their claims that all police officers systematically oppress Black people. That is factually wrong.
Heck, many thousands of officers are Black, Asian, Hispanic, etc.
The Police Chief of Chicago is Black as is the mayor; the Attorney General of Kentucky is Black, etc.
In some cities, a few officers have been shown to be racist, but that is a regrettable minority, not most, let alone all police officers.
What is often the case in many of these infamous cases of alleged racism by officers is that people of color aren't attacked by officers because of their color but because the individuals are engaging in criminal activities and resist arrest.
In only one protest by BLMers in Chicago, over 50 police officers were injured! The Chief of Police documents the riot-violence of the protesters in a news video.
Noting about racism at all.
Seek the Good, the True, and the Just,
Dan Wilcox
"Wokeness is at its best not as a punctiliar moment of revelation equivalent to the old Methodist perfectionism but rather an invitation to examine oneself and become woke every day to one’s own sin and wickedness including in the area of race.”
-Randal Rauser, Canadian Systematic Theologian at Taylor Seminary.
https://randalrauser.com/2021/11/a-review-of-owen-strachans-debate-performance-on-unbelievable/
Rauser appears to defend the claim that systemic racism exists at present in the United States even though it isn’t as bad as during Jim Crow and antebellum slavery.
While I agree that in some places and among some individuals overt racism does still exist. I think that the claim there is “systemic racism” in all of the U.S. is not only untrue, but is an ideological falsehood of the worst sort.
A number of Black scholars including Thomas Sowell, Professor of Economics, author of A Conflict of Visions and Walter Williams, Distinguished Professor of Economics at George Mason University have emphasized that while some racism does exist and needs to be strongly opposed, “systemic racism” doesn’t exist in present day America.
I do agree with Rauser that each of us do need to regularly check his/herself see whether or not we are being biased against others because of race, sex, class or nationality.
However, I don’t agree that all Americans and Canadians “struggle with all sorts of impulses to be prejudiced against other people” because of “sin and the fallen human nature.”
Unlike Rauser, I don’t believe in the creedal doctrine of Original Sin, don’t think humans are born sinful, totally depraved, “in essence, evil” because of Adam’s eating a fruit, like the vast majority of Christians do.
Original Sin or Systemic Racism of Whiteness and similar ideological claims have no basis in reality.
1. Geneticists seems to have demonstrated that there never were 2 humans 6,000 years ago who were the origin of all the billions of humans today. Instead, the evidence so far indicates that all of humankind came from a few thousand individuals in existence many thousadns of years ago.
2. Original Sin is a pernicious doctrine that claims what the alleged wrong the ancestor of all humans did thousands of years ago was innately transferred to each infant of him and down to each grandchild, great-grantchild, etc. This total depravity, sinfulness is so innate within human nature every infant upon conception and birth has this sinfulness within them, unable to overcome it. Indeed, according to this doctrine, even good actions by each of us, are actually sinful!! A wrong action by another person, even if it was by our parent can't be innately inserted within us as children because we are their children.
Even if such a biological claim could be possible (which it isn't), that would be utterly evil, to blame a child, even a day-old infant for what wrong-doing his parent did.
This strange doctrine of Christianity also demeans the Creator. A good Creator would never insert utter sinfulness into each new human infant, no matter how sinful his/her father was.
Original Sin is also a denial of human choice, creativity, ability, and inherent worth.
Etc.
This new ideological claim of "woke" humans, that whites are guilty of systematic racism stereotypes unique individuals based upon such a superficiality as skin color. It's claim all humans with white skin are racists is very untrue, unfair, and delusionary.
Woke believers ought to read a good scholarly book on genetics. Geneticists have discovered that there is more variation within some racial groupings than there is between 2 different racial groups!
Furthermore, such a claim is contrary to the history of humankind. Racism isn't unique to one racial grouping. It appears in various contexts among all human groups.
While European whites, especially the
British, were mostly racist against Blacks in North America and Africa in the past, other races and nationalities in different times were also given to prejudice.
In the last 30 years, in Zimbabwe, for instance, there is clear evidence of racial prejudice against whites. And in China for centuries there was prejudice against anyone who wasn't Chinese.
Japanese have been very prejudiced against non-Japanese.
In history, North Africans enslaved over a million white Europeans over a period of 300 years!
There was plenty of prejudice, abuse, and enslavement in the Americas before whites ever showed up here. Various native American groups treated other native groups unfairly, even massacred the "other."
Instead, of prejudice and racism being something unique about humans with white skin, humans generally are given to IN GROUP VERSUS OUT GROUP bias, and to unfair treatment toward others, regardless of the color of skin in particular.
We all can fall for the will to power, the temptation to generalize and stereotype, etc. For example, BLM leaders often did it on their website in their claims that all police officers systematically oppress Black people. That is factually wrong.
Heck, many thousands of officers are Black, Asian, Hispanic, etc.
The Police Chief of Chicago is Black as is the mayor; the Attorney General of Kentucky is Black, etc.
In some cities, a few officers have been shown to be racist, but that is a regrettable minority, not most, let alone all police officers.
What is often the case in many of these infamous cases of alleged racism by officers is that people of color aren't attacked by officers because of their color but because the individuals are engaging in criminal activities and resist arrest.
In only one protest by BLMers in Chicago, over 50 police officers were injured! The Chief of Police documents the riot-violence of the protesters in a news video.
Noting about racism at all.
Seek the Good, the True, and the Just,
Dan Wilcox
Tuesday, August 8, 2017
The Ugly History of Father Serra: Founder of California Missions
Just finished a very depressing history but powerful biography, Junipero Serra: California’s Founding Father
by Stephen W. Hackel, Associate Professor of History,
University of California, Riverside
As usual, history is very different from—and stranger than--what most people,
based on popular understanding, assume. What an informative, tragic contrast
to the glowing presentations of California Missions in schools,
at the California Missions themselves, and the general public knowledge.
#1 The most shocking discovery in the reading is that Father Serra, brilliant achiever (from an island off the coast of Spain), priest, professor, missionary, was an agent of Inquisition in Mexico! Very troubling.
I thought that the Franciscans, started by St. Francis, didn’t do such horrid stuff.
#2 Tragically, one discovers in this thorough biography that the Franciscans (and the Jesuits, etc.) were guilty of plenty of abuse, intolerance, and injustice.
Serra and other monks punished, whipped, and kidnapped-back natives who ran away from the Missions:-(
They sent out Spanish soldiers to capture "fugitive" natives and bring them back to the Missions to be physically punished.
And the soldiers—some excons-turned soldiers
sent up from central Mexico--were definitely not a good representation of the Christian religion nor of civil society.
Some soldiers used to chase natives and lasso young women and then rape them.
#3 Father Serra—and evidently many other Franciscan monks—beat, whipped, and abused their own bodies, too. Really sickening.
Hackel explains that such behavior was probably why Serra whipped natives. If it was important for a priest to beat and lash his body into submission, then, surely, natives needed the same treatment.
And, also, since Serra considered natives his "children," he was following standard practice in Spanish society of how to punish wayward children.
But most of these behaviors were contrary to native Californians, who didn't abuse their children.
#4 Serra and the other monks were caught up with the incessant adoration of the Virgin Mary and praying to Roman Catholic saints. Serra claimed miracles had been performed by Mary and by St. Joseph, the travelers' saint.
#5 Serra and the other Spanish missionaries gave very strong veneration to their dead leaders' bones—especially the thigh bone of one former Franciscan saint. Very weird.
What is this with many religions’ obsession with the bones of their leaders!? Even Buddhists still venerate a toe of the Buddha! Religions are very so bizarre and irrational.
Of course, I realize the truth of the statement in Not Without My Daughter, “That every religion not your own seems weird.”
But adoring old bones?!
#6 I will grant that Serra, as Hackel emphasizes, was an amazingly determined, dedicated, brilliant, courageous zealot and that he did seek to protect the natives from some of the worst abuses of the Spanish System.
But at other times, Serra was an overbearing, abusive, intolerant ‘father’ (as he considered the Indians his “children”).
He, also called the natives "infidels" and, so, besides all the bad actions already mentioned, he opposed the Spanish Governor’s efforts to move acculturated natives into voting for their own leaders.
#7 Serra liked to have total control of the missionary endeavor. In fact, he went outside of Franciscan and Spanish official channels, and met with the Viceroy of Mexico in order to counter the Spanish ruler of Alta California who he opposed.
When Serra was ordered to not communicate with the Viceroy again, he used Catholic theological 'reasoning' to interpret that to mean he couldn't send official documents to the Viceroy, but that he could still send personal letters!
#8 Serra, as has been the case of so many famous human leaders, was a zoo of contradictions:
"He stated that he was always obedient to his superiors, but...
he did largely what he pleased, with few checks on his own authority and actions beyond the narrow confines of his order and mission...
"He had a domineering personality but was bereft of an individual self; he was opinionated, strong-willed, determined, and passionately devoted to his life's work but was typical of his age in that he had no real identity of his own beyond his order."
ETC.
Junipero Serra, page 242
Serra may not have been has bad as Columbus who enslaved and slaughtered so many "Indians," however Serra doesn’t deserve to be called “California’s Founding Father.”
BUT then neither do any of the other manipulative, oppressive, destructive leaders of early Alta and American California. Hackel writes that the Americans were even more cruel and destructive when they took over, ousting the Mexicans.
Several times I almost quit this negative tome and returned it to the library unfinished, but I hiked on to the conclusion and am thankful I did. But I doubt that I will ever visit a California Mission with as much appreciation as I used to do.
And I now remember my long hours spent with our kids helping them do their Mission Projects in 4th grade, and feel ashamed.
Evaluation: C+
8/8/17
Live for the Light of Truth, Goodness, Justice, Reason, Math, and Beauty,
Daniel Wilcox
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)





