5 ms·

But read my reply further. I'm okay and I'm sure most are with an "African Museum", or something like that. That museum would be dominated by POC, just like an

by SamUK96 10y ago

But read my reply further. I'm okay and I'm sure most are with an "African Museum", or something like that. That museum would be dominated by POC, just like an "American History Museum" would be dominated by White people. It's not racist. It's history. Also, surely you can see the shortfalls in trying to solve today's racism with treating one race over another, right? Surely?

legodt 10y ago
This opinion is extremely naive and ignorant. White people controlled history through imperialism and colonialism for centuries, and the histories were all written by white people. Of course all the other museums feature white people only, because in the western world white people were the dominant, oppressive class. It is important to preserve these stories and histories that would have otherwise been lost in a white narrative
- mooseburger 10y ago
  While I agree that these stories and histories are worth preserving, I would rather they were integrated into current historical accounts and current museums, creating more complete picture, rather than the racial segregationist approach this museum represents.
  - legodt 10y ago
    Fair, but there is a lot of institutional racism in the art world and academia, so progress on these counts is extremely slow moving. Also, some would argue that as a result of how history is written, that it is important to have black owned institutions with black curation because the narratives and histories between black and white Americans is so vast that it is important that black people get to control their narrative and history to prevent cultural erasure. A post racial world is ideal, but simply not possible
    - mooseburger 10y ago
      My concern with this approach is that it seems it will only keep old resentments alive, as opposed to celebrating their culture. If every nation, race, and culture in the world held on to every atrocity committed against them, the planet would be covered in perpetual war...
    - michaelbuddy 10y ago
      There's definitely a lot of institutional racism in academia. Outright favoritism for people of color for no other reason than their skin color. In Admissions programs, hiring practices, scholarships as well as many instances during normal campus life. Campuses go out of their way to not be racist to the point where they are racist. Absolutely ridiculous. And it really hurts the self-esteem of people to be given special treatment b/c of their color.
  - burkaman 10y ago
    I think that's just kind of impractical. There are slavery and civil rights exhibits in American history museums, but the full topic is just too expansive for a couple exhibits. It's the same concept of having a Thomas Jefferson museum, or a suffragette movement museum, or any individual topic.
alooackbar 10y ago
There already is a White Museum. It celebrates empire and it's called the British Museum.
burkaman 10y ago
Highlighting black people does not place them "over" anyone. We are not replacing another museum with this one. There are plenty of African exhibits in the Natural History museum and elsewhere and those are great, but it's not the same. Do you not think slavery, Jim Crow, civil rights, etc. is a worthwhile topic? Is it not clearly an extremely important area that deserves an entire museum, rather than a couple exhibits here and there? And finally, imagine a hypothetical country where we enslaved black people for 100 years, and then ceased all slavery and racism completely. One day there were slaves, the next slavery is abolished and nobody is racist. Is the problem solved? Are black people now equal to everyone else? No, because history didn't disappear, they still used to be slaves. They have no money, no land, no friends in power, no education, etc. Their lives still suck, no matter how impartial everyone else is. Again, you can't solve a problem by ignoring it. Pretending black people have no disadvantages and can be treated exactly the same as white people is just naïve, and impractical. It is not racist to acknowledge existing racism, and try to counteract it. There is a line, and it's completely possible for racism to negatively affect white people, but building a black history museum does not come anywhere near that line.
- SamUK96 10y ago
  But, do you think that black people really still suffer from such "post-racist-society" effects nowadays, like in your hypothetical country? I doubt.
  - pj_mukh 10y ago
    Great question! Why don't we ask Black people? :) After all there isn't really an "objective" measure of oppression, its simply the sum total of people's experience, which museums like this try to capture.
  - burkaman 10y ago
    Yes, I do. This is easy to see with studies of job applications, loan applications, etc. We don't have to guess.
- michaelbuddy 10y ago
Jonnax 10y ago
So you're saying that standard museums of history are majority white in the US/UK and that is fine because it's the truth. That proves the reason for the existence of a black history museum then, because there are people that are overlooked. Do they not deserve to have their story told? Because that's the point of a museum. Stating that act of creating a museum for black history is racist towards white people makes as much sense as a museum for wooden boats being an affront to the metallic boats. It's very easy to see that there would be value in having a black history museum in a country where the majority of people are white. You can say the same for a "white history" museum in a country where being white is not the majority. However, what you'll find is that a lot of countries have a colonial history that ties into their history significantly. Where white Europeans came along and by force conquered them. Anyway, did you even read the article? It gives plenty of context for the museum. I don't see you arguing against it however, instead you've just latched onto it being a "Black" History museum.

by SamUK96 10y ago

legodt 10y ago

This opinion is extremely naive and ignorant. White people controlled history through imperialism and colonialism for centuries, and the histories were all written by white people. Of course all the other museums feature white people only, because in the western world white people were the dominant, oppressive class. It is important to preserve these stories and histories that would have otherwise been lost in a white narrative

mooseburger 10y ago
While I agree that these stories and histories are worth preserving, I would rather they were integrated into current historical accounts and current museums, creating more complete picture, rather than the racial segregationist approach this museum represents.
- legodt 10y ago
  Fair, but there is a lot of institutional racism in the art world and academia, so progress on these counts is extremely slow moving. Also, some would argue that as a result of how history is written, that it is important to have black owned institutions with black curation because the narratives and histories between black and white Americans is so vast that it is important that black people get to control their narrative and history to prevent cultural erasure. A post racial world is ideal, but simply not possible
  - mooseburger 10y ago
    My concern with this approach is that it seems it will only keep old resentments alive, as opposed to celebrating their culture. If every nation, race, and culture in the world held on to every atrocity committed against them, the planet would be covered in perpetual war...
  - michaelbuddy 10y ago
    There's definitely a lot of institutional racism in academia. Outright favoritism for people of color for no other reason than their skin color. In Admissions programs, hiring practices, scholarships as well as many instances during normal campus life. Campuses go out of their way to not be racist to the point where they are racist. Absolutely ridiculous. And it really hurts the self-esteem of people to be given special treatment b/c of their color.
- burkaman 10y ago
  I think that's just kind of impractical. There are slavery and civil rights exhibits in American history museums, but the full topic is just too expansive for a couple exhibits. It's the same concept of having a Thomas Jefferson museum, or a suffragette movement museum, or any individual topic.

alooackbar 10y ago

There already is a White Museum. It celebrates empire and it's called the British Museum.

burkaman 10y ago

Highlighting black people does not place them "over" anyone. We are not replacing another museum with this one. There are plenty of African exhibits in the Natural History museum and elsewhere and those are great, but it's not the same. Do you not think slavery, Jim Crow, civil rights, etc. is a worthwhile topic? Is it not clearly an extremely important area that deserves an entire museum, rather than a couple exhibits here and there? And finally, imagine a hypothetical country where we enslaved black people for 100 years, and then ceased all slavery and racism completely. One day there were slaves, the next slavery is abolished and nobody is racist. Is the problem solved? Are black people now equal to everyone else? No, because history didn't disappear, they still used to be slaves. They have no money, no land, no friends in power, no education, etc. Their lives still suck, no matter how impartial everyone else is. Again, you can't solve a problem by ignoring it. Pretending black people have no disadvantages and can be treated exactly the same as white people is just naïve, and impractical. It is not racist to acknowledge existing racism, and try to counteract it. There is a line, and it's completely possible for racism to negatively affect white people, but building a black history museum does not come anywhere near that line.

SamUK96 10y ago
But, do you think that black people really still suffer from such "post-racist-society" effects nowadays, like in your hypothetical country? I doubt.
- pj_mukh 10y ago
  Great question! Why don't we ask Black people? :) After all there isn't really an "objective" measure of oppression, its simply the sum total of people's experience, which museums like this try to capture.
- burkaman 10y ago
  Yes, I do. This is easy to see with studies of job applications, loan applications, etc. We don't have to guess.
michaelbuddy 10y ago

Jonnax 10y ago

So you're saying that standard museums of history are majority white in the US/UK and that is fine because it's the truth. That proves the reason for the existence of a black history museum then, because there are people that are overlooked. Do they not deserve to have their story told? Because that's the point of a museum. Stating that act of creating a museum for black history is racist towards white people makes as much sense as a museum for wooden boats being an affront to the metallic boats. It's very easy to see that there would be value in having a black history museum in a country where the majority of people are white. You can say the same for a "white history" museum in a country where being white is not the majority. However, what you'll find is that a lot of countries have a colonial history that ties into their history significantly. Where white Europeans came along and by force conquered them. Anyway, did you even read the article? It gives plenty of context for the museum. I don't see you arguing against it however, instead you've just latched onto it being a "Black" History museum.