Harriet Tubman New Face of the $20 - Page 2

LemonMelon · 04-20-2016, 08:03 PM

In case anyone was morbidly curious, the argument for keeping Jackson on the twenty is that we're whitewashing history. And, besides, our founding fathers had checkered pasts too, right? No big deal.

I'd argue that there's a difference between "checkered past" and "genocidal." But, you know. I'm preaching to the choir.

Moonlit_Angel · 04-20-2016, 08:16 PM

How much you want to bet the same people griping about this see no problem with school textbooks that "edit out" notable non-white figures in history, or minimizing the impact of slavery (or calling it something else altogether), or whatever?

Sigh. Is it sad that I'm not even remotely surprised there'd be idiots coming out of the woodwork to make a comment about this?

trojanchick99 · 04-20-2016, 08:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BVS

I just accidentally opened an article about this on Facebook, I didn't pay attention to who posted it, and it was from Fox News, the comment section made me sick to my stomach.

Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

I read some comments and some lady was upset they took a "Founding Father" off the $20. Seriously.

But yeah, they are complaining of whitewashing. Like somehow if he's not on the front of the 20 no one will learn about him. Ugh.

Or they bring up the fact that the actual founding fathers were slave owners so the "left" will come after them next. Sigh.

bono_212 · 04-20-2016, 09:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by trojanchick99

I read some comments and some lady was upset they took a "Founding Father" off the $20. Seriously.

But yeah, they are complaining of whitewashing. Like somehow if he's not on the front of the 20 no one will learn about him. Ugh.

Or they bring up the fact that the actual founding fathers were slave owners so the "left" will come after them next. Sigh.

History should only remember him for the atrocity he was responsible for.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Axver

Ahh I get you. Though given that Jackson owned slaves and Tubman escaped slavery, isn't she still a bit of a fuck you to him?

I mean, yeah, a bit. Slavery is/was terrible. It's just... Yeah... Genocide. I don't care who's on the bill, if it gets people talking about this.

LemonMelon · 04-20-2016, 09:19 PM

One is the systematic destruction of a race, the other is the systematic abuse of a race and Jackson contributed to both.

All things considered, Tubman is a much more appropriate choice than Susan B Anthony at least.

Vlad n U 2 · 04-20-2016, 09:51 PM

Wasn't she an SJW?

Quote:

Originally Posted by bono_212

I'm just by and large frustrated because I don't feel like we've done enough as a country, at all, to address the situation with Native Americans.

digitize · 04-20-2016, 10:40 PM

Unfortunately, Jackson is still staying on the $20 bill, just being moved to the back. I'd happily put literally any Native American figure there instead of him.

Jackson really bothers me. He was a really, really, really horrible president, and his actions against Native Americans stand out to me as exceptionally terrible even by the standards of the day. But maybe that's the liberal propaganda of my AP US History education from all those years ago getting to me.

bono_212 · 04-20-2016, 10:50 PM

Wait... What... He's staying?

Fuck everything

Sent from my XT1575 using U2 Interference mobile app

digitize · 04-20-2016, 10:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bono_212

Wait... What... He's staying?

Fuck everything

Sent from my XT1575 using U2 Interference mobile app

Yeah.

Treasury Decides To Put Harriet Tubman On $20 Bill : The Two-Way : NPR

Quote:

In a statement, the Treasury also announced that the new $20 note will keep an image of Jackson, who was a slaveholder, on the back. The new $10 bill will keep Hamilton on the front but in the back feature "an image of the historic march for suffrage that ended on the steps of the Treasury Department." Leaders of that movement — Lucretia Mott, Sojourner Truth, Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Alice Paul — will be honored in the image.

bono_212 · 04-20-2016, 10:56 PM

LemonMelon · 04-20-2016, 11:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by digitize

Unfortunately, Jackson is still staying on the $20 bill, just being moved to the back. I'd happily put literally any Native American figure there instead of him.

Putting a slaveowner on the same bill as a famous abolitionist is fucking disgusting. They do understand that, right?

Are they making a statement by putting a slaveowner on the less notable side of the bill? Because until they rectify this, that will be my extremely optimistic interpretation.

bono_212 · 04-20-2016, 11:03 PM

Why are they glorifying him at all...fuuuucckk.

Today did one thing for me, though, I'm going to start looking for ways to get more involved in whatever organizations I might be able to, to maybe find a way to help with Native American causes. Stop being a hypocrite myself and see what I can do.

BVS · 04-20-2016, 11:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by trojanchick99

I read some comments and some lady was upset they took a "Founding Father" off the $20. Seriously.

But yeah, they are complaining of whitewashing. Like somehow if he's not on the front of the 20 no one will learn about him. Ugh.

Or they bring up the fact that the actual founding fathers were slave owners so the "left" will come after them next. Sigh.

Yeah, if I had received a $20 for every comment that was absolutely factually incorrect; I'd be able to buy a nice house. If I got one for every racist comment; I could retire.

Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

Moonlit_Angel · 04-20-2016, 11:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LemonMelon

Putting a slaveowner on the same bill as a famous abolitionist is fucking disgusting.

My immediate reaction to that news:

Yeeeeeeeah, I too would really like to hear an explanation/reason for that decision.

BVS · 04-20-2016, 11:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by digitize

Unfortunately, Jackson is still staying on the $20 bill, just being moved to the back. I'd happily put literally any Native American figure there instead of him.

Jackson really bothers me. He was a really, really, really horrible president, and his actions against Native Americans stand out to me as exceptionally terrible even by the standards of the day. But maybe that's the liberal propaganda of my AP US History education from all those years ago getting to me.

This is fucked. Good thing I don't use cash that much.

Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

digitize · 04-20-2016, 11:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LemonMelon

Putting a slaveowner on the same bill as a famous abolitionist is fucking disgusting. They do understand that, right?

Are they making a statement by putting a slaveowner on the less notable side of the bill? Because until they rectify this, that will be my extremely optimistic interpretation.

Part of me thinks that this is a sassy move to make a point by relegating Jackson to the back of a bill fronted by a former slave.

LuckyNumber7 · 04-20-2016, 11:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LemonMelon

Are they making a statement by putting a slaveowner on the less notable side of the bill? Because until they rectify this, that will be my extremely optimistic interpretation.

I'd have to see it to judge it, but this was actually my immediate interpretation upon hearing that.

cobl04 · 04-20-2016, 11:57 PM

I was very excited to hear this until I read that he's staying on the bill. Sickening.

LuckyNumber7 · 04-21-2016, 12:09 AM

I'm really surprised to see how angry people are about something that seems so positive... it's symbolic, which is already not worth a whole lot.

BVS · 04-21-2016, 12:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7

I'm really surprised to see how angry people are about something that seems so positive... it's symbolic, which is already not worth a whole lot.

I agree to a certain point, but "not worth a lot", really? How many currency changes have been made in your or your parents lifetime? It's a huge symbolic change.

Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

04-20-2016, 08:03 PM	#21
LemonMelon More 5G Than Man Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Hollywoo Posts: 68,800 Local Time: 08:44 AM	Harriet Tubman New Face of the $20 In case anyone was morbidly curious, the argument for keeping Jackson on the twenty is that we're whitewashing history. And, besides, our founding fathers had checkered pasts too, right? No big deal. I'd argue that there's a difference between "checkered past" and "genocidal." But, you know. I'm preaching to the choir. __________________

04-20-2016, 08:16 PM	#22
Moonlit_Angel Blue Crack Addict Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo... Posts: 20,774 Local Time: 09:44 AM	How much you want to bet the same people griping about this see no problem with school textbooks that "edit out" notable non-white figures in history, or minimizing the impact of slavery (or calling it something else altogether), or whatever? Sigh. Is it sad that I'm not even remotely surprised there'd be idiots coming out of the woodwork to make a comment about this? __________________

04-20-2016, 10:50 PM	#28
bono_212 Blue Crack Distributor Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 83,919 Local Time: 08:44 AM	Wait... What... He's staying? Fuck everything Sent from my XT1575 using U2 Interference mobile app __________________

04-20-2016, 10:56 PM	#30
bono_212 Blue Crack Distributor Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 83,919 Local Time: 08:44 AM	__________________

04-20-2016, 11:03 PM	#32
bono_212 Blue Crack Distributor Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 83,919 Local Time: 08:44 AM	Why are they glorifying him at all...fuuuucckk. Today did one thing for me, though, I'm going to start looking for ways to get more involved in whatever organizations I might be able to, to maybe find a way to help with Native American causes. Stop being a hypocrite myself and see what I can do. __________________

04-20-2016, 09:19 PM	#25
LemonMelon More 5G Than Man Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Hollywoo Posts: 68,800 Local Time: 08:44 AM	One is the systematic destruction of a race, the other is the systematic abuse of a race and Jackson contributed to both. All things considered, Tubman is a much more appropriate choice than Susan B Anthony at least.

04-20-2016, 10:40 PM	#27
digitize ONE love, blood, life Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: New York / Dallas / Austin Posts: 14,119 Local Time: 09:44 AM	Unfortunately, Jackson is still staying on the $20 bill, just being moved to the back. I'd happily put literally any Native American figure there instead of him. Jackson really bothers me. He was a really, really, really horrible president, and his actions against Native Americans stand out to me as exceptionally terrible even by the standards of the day. But maybe that's the liberal propaganda of my AP US History education from all those years ago getting to me.

04-20-2016, 11:57 PM	#38
cobl04 45:33 Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: East Point to Shaolin Posts: 59,231 Local Time: 02:44 AM	I was very excited to hear this until I read that he's staying on the bill. Sickening.

04-21-2016, 12:09 AM	#39
LuckyNumber7 Blue Crack Addict Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Washington, DC Posts: 19,736 Local Time: 10:44 AM	I'm really surprised to see how angry people are about something that seems so positive... it's symbolic, which is already not worth a whole lot.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode