(07-21-2022, 07:53 AM)JohnnyBurnham Wrote: I've read the book, so it's a good news to go watching the movie, thanks for announcement!

(07-21-2022, 06:05 PM)LevelUP Wrote:

(07-21-2022, 07:53 AM)JohnnyBurnham Wrote: I've read the book, so it's a good news to go watching the movie, thanks for announcement!

What book are you referring to?

This is a documentary.

(07-21-2022, 10:12 PM)freeloader Wrote:

(07-21-2022, 06:05 PM)LevelUP Wrote:

(07-21-2022, 07:53 AM)JohnnyBurnham Wrote: I've read the book, so it's a good news to go watching the movie, thanks for announcement!

What book are you referring to?

This is a documentary.

Documentary is an awfully strong word to describe this film. 

The film uses a series of historical vignettes to demonstrate how the Democratic Party has been bad to black people and the Republicans have been good. Almost all of them intentionally contort and misinterpret that history. 

I will acknowledge that the welfare state as it developed in the United States did harm to the black family and that the erosion of the black family has had far-reaching negative impacts on American society and the black population specifically. 

But this one fact does not mean that the rest of the dreck shoveled by this film has any legitimacy. Much is made of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, for instance. The film rightly claims that a higher percentage of Republicans voted for the Act than Democrats. Of course, they fail to mention that the vote was essentially sectional with Southerners voting against it and Northerners and Westerns voting for it. It is also not mentioned that the parties were much more “big tent” parties with more liberal and conservative elements within each party. It is not mentioned that virtually all of the people who voted against the Act were conservatives and that liberals overwhelmingly voted for it. Al Gore Sr is mentioned regarding his efforts to block the Act and that he remained a Democrat for the rest of his life. Fair enough. What isn’t mentioned is that he subsequently changed his opinion on the Act and actually apologized later in life for opposing it.  Conveniently, they fail to mention that the filibuster that Gore participated in had one its most prominent supporters in Strom Thurmond who left the Democratic Party IN 1964 LARGELY OVER ITS SUPPORT FOR THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT.  Remember, of course, that Thurmond had been one of the nation’s most prominent segregationists. What you may not know is that shortly after Thurmond bolted the Democrats, fellow South Carolinian Rep Albert Watson left the Democratic Party for the GOP.  In 1970, as a Republican, he would campaign for governor of South Carolina. The themes of his campaign: white supremacy, opposition to the Civil Rights Acts, and the Voting Rights Acts. 

The film tries to argue that the parties didn’t switch. That is true, up to a point. They didn’t really switch. The conservative elements left the Democratic Party and joined the Republicans. The liberal elements left the Republican Party and joined the Democrats. The concept of a RINO would have been literally unthinkable before around 1960 and still laughable before Reagan. 

The whole film is like this. If you don’t know history, if you don’t care to know history, or if you don’t really understand history, then you can easily fall into the traps laid by the people who made this film.

(07-21-2022, 10:12 PM)freeloader Wrote: If you don’t know history, if you don’t care to know history, or if you don’t really understand history, then you can easily fall into the traps laid by the people who made this film.