I’m not familiar with those Dr. Seuss books but I remember when folks were talking about those being banned last year. Historically, hasn’t “To Kill A Mockingbird” been banned by people who *don’t* want to combat racism? Because it does a great job of illustrating how evil it is.
-
-
Replying to @ECUProfessor @arcade_projects
Yeah, To Kill a Mockingbird is frequently challenged for language, the use of a “white savior”, and other reasons. The problem with the Dr Seuss books is nobody banned then. The Seuss estate was taking those particular books out of print.
2 replies 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @dukrous @arcade_projects
Does the “white savior” in this case refer to Atticus, the lawyer and father who took a principled stance in order to defend a Black man who the racist villains of the story were trying to frame for rape? There was also a scene in which he and his daughter prevented a lynching.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
However this wasn't some kind of Iron Fist rich white kid goes to magic china and becomes the chosen martial artist over all the Chinese people that trained for generations nonsense. This was someone in power, at a time when black people couldn't be lawyers, trying to 1/2
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @RS_Wolfie @ECUProfessor and
Fix a broken system from the top down because the people at the bottom didn't have the power to make the changes that needed to happen. 2/2
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Yeah, I always thought that the whole idea was that Atticus was supposed to be a model of desirable behavior, risking everything to defend someone who was oppressed in spite of being in a social environment in which it would have been much easier and safer to bow to a racist mob.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Had this been the route of the discussion on MiSTer Discord, there'd be no problem. This is honestly a very intelligent discussion, no one is being dismissive, and we are working through the lesson as teachers intend when they assign the book. Not everyone can handle that sadly.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Fair point, but counter point: The way the post introduced this was very confrontational. "The left doesn't want you to read" ect. Firstly the publisher themselves pulled the books from printing, no one forced them to or had a boycott. Secondly, 1/2
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Oh, that makes things a lot clearer. I didn't recognize it as satire because I've never seen anything posted by that person before. But I've seen enough people that really act like that (on both sides) to not recognize it as satire without more context so I probably wasn't alone.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
Sounds like the artistic work was artisanally handcrafted with the care that was required to invoke the thought exercise we are all now engaged in. Good satire makes it hard to distinguish imagination from reality. There's a lot to unpack here sadly. Having a bit of a laugh helps
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.