Vikings' committee...

[Guest]

So should the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution be abolished because of who wrote them?  I would vote no, but that's just me.

[Guest]

@1VikesFan said:
So should the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution be abolished because of who wrote them?  I would vote no, but that's just me.

Is anyone saying it should? I mean, at some point, making silly comparisons like this does what exactly? Flawed men wrote the Constitution but also brilliant. Doesn't mean we can't discuss those flaws. And what does that have to do with a restaurant chain called Sambos, an obvious racist term, changing its name? That's the slippery slope some are so concerned about? 

I've mentioned that some people take this shit WAY too far and parts of the media will run with it like every kid under 25 believes exactly that. That's not true. But many want to make positive changes in the world and do so peacefully but visibly. Isn't that what we want our children to be, empathetic and determined? Wanting to be heard? Not all do it for altruistic reasons, that's for sure which I've mentioned before. But regardless, I think its obvious that some things were long overdue for change. Some people are uncomfortable with that and others are being manipulated into fearing what that might look like. 

[Guest]

They are talking about removing the statues of some of these same brilliant but flawed men.  Even thought I don't agree with it, I don't think the comparison is really that silly based on what's happening in the country right.

[Guest]

@1VikesFan said:
They are talking about removing the statues of some of these same brilliant but flawed men.  Even thought I don't agree with it, I don't think the comparison is really that silly based on what's happening in the country right.

But that wasn't the question you asked. The question you asked was silly.

[Guest]

@purplefaithful said:

@savannahskol said:

@purplefaithful said:

 There is a big difference between remembering and honoring.

This is a profound statement.  And I agree.  
But can there be either (remembering & honoring), if all vestiges (statues, etc)  are gone?  

And yet, you left out LEARNING (from historical markers), from the remembering and honoring options. 

Who really wants to remember Auschwitz? (no one)
Who really  wants to honor Auschwitz? (no one)
Q?: Why the hell would the Smithsonian want to protect Auschwitz?  
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/c...d-4650863/
A?:  Of course, so we can witness and LEARN from man's most inhumane moment(s) in recent modern history. 


You don't wipe history because it's 'uncomfortable'.  You LEARN from it.  
Choosing to be willfully (politically correct) ignorant, is not an option.  (For me)

Oh there are plenty of conversations, you're just not participating. 

...

Some conversations are happening.  And also other times people are just
destroying public property without having a discussion.


When conversations don’t happen you get a story like
this.  Where the “conversation” happens
in public with violence.


Group A is trying to take the monument down with force.  Group B is trying to prevent them from taking
down the monument with force.


Person from Group B hurts someone from Group A while trying
to prevent them from damaging the public property.  Multiple people from Group A start attacking
the person from Group B with weapons (skateboards).  Person from Group A uses a gun to defend
himself and shoots one of the people from Group B that was attacking him.


The entire time the police watched the whole set of events
unfold up until the gunshots happened.

https://www.krqe.com/news/albuquerque-metro/video-tensions-escalated-leading-up-to-shooting-at-onate-protest/

[Guest]

@StickyBun said:

@1VikesFan said:
They are talking about removing the statues of some of these same brilliant but flawed men.  Even thought I don't agree with it, I don't think the comparison is really that silly based on what's happening in the country right.

But that wasn't the question you asked. The question you asked was silly.

Was it?  I would have said talking about removing statues of Jefferson was silly too but that's been put out there.  Either way I'm glad you find me silly.

[Guest]

@1VikesFan said:

@StickyBun said:

@1VikesFan said:
They are talking about removing the statues of some of these same brilliant but flawed men.  Even thought I don't agree with it, I don't think the comparison is really that silly based on what's happening in the country right.

But that wasn't the question you asked. The question you asked was silly.

Was it?  I would have said talking about removing statues of Jefferson was silly too but that's been put out there.  Either way I'm glad you find me silly.

Abolishing the Constitution and taking down a statue of Jefferson in Portland, Oregon....yeah, same level stuff.  :/

[Guest]

How did a thread about the good work a star player and the praise worthy owners of this team turn into this?  Both putting up their own time and or money in the hope  it creates change. 
Proud of Eric, proud of the Wilfs. Keep up the good work. Sure beats the all business attitude of Red the cheap and heartless.

[Guest]

@StickyBun said:

@1VikesFan said:

@StickyBun said:

@1VikesFan said:
They are talking about removing the statues of some of these same brilliant but flawed men.  Even thought I don't agree with it, I don't think the comparison is really that silly based on what's happening in the country right.

But that wasn't the question you asked. The question you asked was silly.

Was it?  I would have said talking about removing statues of Jefferson was silly too but that's been put out there.  Either way I'm glad you find me silly.

Abolishing the Constitution and taking down a statue of Jefferson in Portland, Oregon....yeah, same level stuff.  :/

I will make sure the next time I don't like or agree with something you post to point out how inane it is, sound good dude?

[Guest]

From Aunt Jemima to Uncle Ben's, a reckoning for racist brand names and logos

Quaker Oats, owned by PepsiCo (PEP) since 2001, will say goodbye to Aunt Jemima, the face of its 130-year-old syrup brand. The company will change the name and logo of the brand after social media outcry, driven by singer Kirby Lauryen’s viral TikTok video on “How to make a non-racist breakfast,” in which she told the origin story of Aunt Jemima, then poured out the batter.
“We recognize Aunt Jemima’s origins are based on a racial stereotype,” said Quaker Foods North America CMO Kristin Kroepfl in a statement on Wednesday. “As we work to make progress toward racial equality through several initiatives, we also must take a hard look at our portfolio of brands and ensure they reflect our values and meet our consumers' expectations."
It only took a few hours for Uncle Ben’s Rice parent company Mars Inc to follow suit. The brand on Wednesday said it will retire the Uncle Ben character, long criticized as racist since “uncle” was a common derogatory term white people would use for black men in the Jim Crow era.
Conagra Brands (CAG), owner of Mrs. Butterworth’s, said on Wednesday it is initiating a “complete brand and packaging review on Mrs. Butterworth's.” B&G Foods, owner of Cream of Wheat—which bears a smiling black chef on the box who is based on a racist caricature from minstrel shows—said, “We understand there are concerns regarding the Chef image, and we are committed to evaluating our packaging and will proactively take steps to ensure that we and our brands do not inadvertently contribute to systemic racism.”

On Thursday, Colgate-Palmolive joined the discussion. The company jointly owns Darlie, one of the leading toothpaste brands in China, and now says it is “working with our partner to review and further evolve all aspects of the brand, including the brand name.” Darlie was called Darkie until 1989 and featured on its package a grinning black caricature in a top hat.
Land O’Lakes, member-owned and based in Minnesota, made its move in April. The company removed the kneeling Native American woman, long seen as an offensive stereotype, from all its butter packaging.

Of course, these companies already knew the problems with these logos, and have known for years. A few years ago, Quaker even removed the kerchief from Aunt Jemima in response to criticism, and added pearl earrings and a white collar.

As such, there is a touch of the disingenuous in these rebrands, since they prompt the question: Why did it take so long? And, would these brands have taken these actions without the social media backlash forcing their hand? The moves tend to look reactive rather than proactive.
The popular Grammy-winning country band Lady Antebellum announced this month that the band will change its name to Lady A, dropping the “Antebellum.” The band said in a statement, in part, “We named our band after the Southern ‘antebellum’ style home where we took our first photos.... We did not take into account the associations that weigh down this word referring to the period of history before the Civil War, which includes slavery. We are deeply sorry for the hurt this has caused.”
The band’s statement also addressed the “why now” and “why not sooner” questions that can arise from many of these new rebrands: “We understand that many of you may ask the question ‘Why have you not made this change until now?’ The answer is that we can make no excuse for our lateness to this realization. What we can do is acknowledge it, turn from it, and take action.”

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/from-aunt...29211.html