Mike proffers a number of quotes from Bob:
[“]It is fairly clear, however, that the right wing of that time, was creating a lot of anti-German feeling ("The Huns"), some of it severe enough to cause many Germans in English-Speaking countries to change their last names.[“]
"I have a number of World War I posters that are fairly graphic, and many things and people of German heritage were widely unpopular, much of it stirred up by accounts in the yellow press, almost all of it right wing." (Show me some of those right wing accounts in the yellow press, please)
" Anti-Irish sentiment has been right wing as well in this country for a hundred and fifty years. In Boston, which is the area I am most personally familiar with, the anti-Irish sentiment was very much attached to the anti-immigration sentiment which threatened the grip that the upper classes had on the local power structure from mid-19th century on, and that power structure was predominantly Republican. " (prove it)
Thanks for the links, Bob. They were very interesting. As far as tying the democratic party to the bashing of Irish, Germans, and immigrants in general, I fund them lacking, all except for the last one.
I'm still not sure of the point. You make a shadowy reference to the democratic party of 90 years ago being the same as today. I don;t understand why. Americans killed the Indians and took their lands. White Americans conducted slavery and racial segregation. Does that apply to you, Bob? How many Indians have you killed lately? How many blacks have you told not to use the "white" water fountain? Sins of the fathers? To go a century back to try to prove a point about people today just doesn't make it for me.
What do you think about Truman deporting over two million illegal aliens to free up jobs for Americans after WW2? Do we go back into history to pick apart Democratic actions and then lay them at the feet of the current leaders? Doesn't seem that reasonable to me....
At no point did I say that The Democratic Party was responsible for the bashing of “Irish, Germans, and immigrants in general.” I did lay the responsibility for that behavior at the feet of the various nativist folks, mostly right wing folks, whom I traced back to the “Know Nothings.” These were anti-Catholic, anti-semite, anti-immigrant and often anti-black folks who were at their peak just prior to the civil war, and who helped elect Millard Fillmore.
The politics at the time were somewhat different than now, so there is no one-to one translation of the parties of that time to the parties of today. But it is clear that the Know-nothings were Nativists in the same way that today’s Republicans tend to be nativists; and that the “Know-nothings” were anti-immigrant in the same way that today’s Republicans are often anti-immigrant. Indeed, “Nativist” and “anti-immigrant” can be thought of as synonyms, for all practical purposes.
This statement of your in particular puzzles me, Mike.
I'm still not sure of the point. You make a shadowy reference to the democratic party of 90 years ago being the same as today. I don;t understand why. Americans killed the Indians and took their lands. White Americans conducted slavery and racial segregation. Does that apply to you, Bob?
You asked me to respond to a number of questions you had. At your request, right?
I went to a fair amount of trouble to dig up some answers to answer questions that you had, and now you say that you’ve got no idea why I’m replying?
I’m replying because you specifically asked for a reply to these specific questions, not because I simply felt it was a wonderful way to spend an afternoon when I could have been writing poetry.
My reference to the Democratic party was to the fact not that it was the same as it is today, but that it was different. In case you missed what I was saying, I also said the same about the Republican Party in some ways. I won’t say you got my statements a hundred percent wrong, but close.
What was my point?
Well, what’s the name of the thread, Mike?
It’s about the Racism of the Arizona State Law and the people who voted it into effect. It’s about the history of this sort of thing as it applies to our country, and it’s about the importance of not forgetting that history. If we forget it, we increase of odds of repeating the more ugly parts of it. If we remember, we can learn from it, and hopefully build more useful laws, laws the build upon the best of what we’ve learned and avoid the mistakes we’ve made.
The point is that the Republicans and their ideological ancestors have used immigrants and immigration as a way to rally feeling against outsiders for at least a hundred and fifty years. Who the immigrants may be changes from time to time, but the tactic remains. It consistently uses fear of outsiders to divide the voters against each other. The tactic does not shy from racism when it seems that racism will work.
Democrats have also used racist tactics as well, and paid heavily for trying to put them aside in the mid to late sixties. For the most part, I think they’ve succeeded.
No, I haven’t bought any slaves or killed any Native Americans, but it’s an excellent idea that I re4member that it’s possible that perfectly well meaning people can do so. You don’t have to be a monster, you know; all you have to do is keep your mouth shut when other people are calling for enslaving people or stringing them up without trial or any of the rest of these things, and you’re off to the races again.
You might check out the articles about the hanging and attempted hanging during the first world war I included with the information I added when I saw your request for information about the stuff that happened to German Americans during the first world war.
Nor am I interested in talking about Truman at this point. How about we actually get what we’re talking about here straightened away first before we talk about something that’s off the subject?
The lawsuit is underway now, as I understand it, and that would be closer to the subject than Truman.