Armed Polite Society

Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: MechAg94 on January 13, 2009, 03:47:28 PM

Title: Is the NAACP still relevant?
Post by: MechAg94 on January 13, 2009, 03:47:28 PM
The question comes to mind to me because if this period fashion stuff is all they have to complain about, I just can't help but ask. 

It occurs to me that they could be and probably do a lot that doesn't make the papers, but stuff like this doesn't help their image in my view at least.

http://www.wsfa.com/Global/story.asp?S=9655036&nav=menu33_2

Quote
Montgomery, Ala. (WSFA) --  They're part of a long standing tradition that will soon become a part of Presidential history.

The head of the Alabama NAACP, however, wants Mobile's Azalea Trail Maids to stay home on Inauguration Day, claiming the group reminds him of slavery.

"These are not just regular costumes.  These are the costumes that remind someone of the plantation in Gone with the Wind," Edward Vaughn said in a phone interview.

Vaughn went on to say the group would be the laughing stock of the Inauguration.  County leaders say nothing could be further from the truth.

"We want everyone to know that these young ladies do not need to be identified with slavery," said Mobile County Commissioner Stephen Nodine.

"I don't see what the dresses have to do with racism. I don't see it. It's just a regular dress to me.  Just a dress they wore back in the day," said Carolyn Tius of Montgomery.

Organizers stand behind the tradition, but opponents say tradition is the problem.

"We needed something that could show Alabama's great progress rather than something that shows a shameful past," Vaughn said.
Title: Re: Is the NAACP still relevant?
Post by: Manedwolf on January 13, 2009, 03:52:31 PM
Nothing like being completely ignorant of history, and screaming it for everyone to see.

Guy must be a product of public schools.
Title: Re: Is the NAACP still relevant?
Post by: Standing Wolf on January 13, 2009, 04:00:22 PM
Quote
The question comes to mind to me because if this period fashion stuff is all they have to complain about, I just can't help but ask.

If the NAACP doesn't have anything to complain about, it will concoct something. Its only purpose is to complain—and take in lots of money, of course.
Title: Re: Is the NAACP still relevant?
Post by: Balog on January 13, 2009, 04:16:35 PM
Wait, when were they relevant?
Title: Re: Is the NAACP still relevant?
Post by: HankB on January 14, 2009, 11:21:18 AM
If the NAACP doesn't have anything to complain about, it will concoct something. Its only purpose is to complain—and take in lots of money, of course.
The technique is properly termed "Accuse and Demand."
Title: Re: Is the NAACP still relevant?
Post by: MechAg94 on January 14, 2009, 11:41:12 AM
I am sure they actually do some some things like scholarships and other stuff that is a good, but attention getting stuff like this hurts their image IMO.
Title: Re: Is the NAACP still relevant?
Post by: roo_ster on January 14, 2009, 12:01:47 PM
If a controversy does not occur within an unspecified time period, one must be ginned up out of the best materials at hand.  This was the best they could do, poor devils. 

This does not apply only to NAACP, but most similar pressure groups: ADL, enviro groups, La Raza, etc.
Title: Re: Is the NAACP still relevant?
Post by: longeyes on January 14, 2009, 12:43:56 PM
Well, given that plantationism has become the reigning philosophy of our times, it seems all too appropriate to me.   We are all becoming "Trail Maids."
Title: Re: Is the NAACP still relevant?
Post by: Tallpine on January 14, 2009, 01:03:33 PM
I thought we weren't supposed to call the folks that the NAACP supposedly represents "CP" anymore ???  :O

How come they haven't changed their name to NAABA or even NAAAA ...?  :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Is the NAACP still relevant?
Post by: K Frame on January 14, 2009, 01:42:00 PM
Because it's their organization and they can call it whatever they like?  :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Is the NAACP still relevant?
Post by: JonnyB on January 14, 2009, 04:16:52 PM
Because it's their organization and they can call it whatever they like?  :rolleyes:

Do they allow American Indians in their organization? Asian Indians? Mexican Indians? Hmong? Any other "persons of color"?

Just wondering. I really don't know the answer(s).

jb
Title: Re: Is the NAACP still relevant?
Post by: K Frame on January 14, 2009, 04:24:52 PM
At the time the organization was founded, Colored People meant one thing and one thing alone in the United states -- blacks.
Title: Re: Is the NAACP still relevant?
Post by: Tallpine on January 14, 2009, 04:40:25 PM
At the time the organization was founded, Colored People meant one thing and one thing alone in the United states -- blacks.

Close ;)

Back then we called them "Negroes" or "*******"
Title: Re: Is the NAACP still relevant?
Post by: MicroBalrog on January 15, 2009, 04:00:47 AM
Quote
The question comes to mind to me because if this period fashion stuff is all they have to complain about, I just can't help but ask.

Well, let's see. The goal of the organization has been to combat racist oppression of African-Americans.

(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.truthwinsout.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2007%2F10%2Fobama.jpg&hash=13f8b5013717d715c31e116a1e4d683a34ab445d)

I'd say that settles it.
Title: Re: Is the NAACP still relevant?
Post by: Waitone on January 18, 2009, 08:31:44 AM
NAACP Express--next stop?  Reparations.
Title: Re: Is the NAACP still relevant?
Post by: K Frame on January 19, 2009, 10:49:42 AM
NAACP Express--next stop?  Reparations.

That's certainly in their agenda: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2005/jul/12/20050712-120944-7745r/

That article is a couple of years old, but I've not heard of a change in stance.

My thought has always been that if there are any slaves left alive, they should be able to pursue reparations.

Title: Re: Is the NAACP still relevant?
Post by: erictank on January 19, 2009, 08:22:36 PM
That's certainly in their agenda: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2005/jul/12/20050712-120944-7745r/

That article is a couple of years old, but I've not heard of a change in stance.

My thought has always been that if there are any slaves left alive, they should be able to pursue reparations.

As long as said reparations are collected from any slaveHOLDERS who are still alive, I think I could go along with that.

Under the conditions which actually apply, I think those clamoring for "reparations" from millions of people who never did anything wrong are, to put it politely, barking mad.  Or frakking idiots, take your pick.