0
20

[–] 1989 0 points 20 points (+20|-0) ago 

I can understand how a historian may be biased and have an opinion or two about things but banning other people for interpreting things under a different light is fucked up. There are COUNTLESS instances of shit that hapenned in history where you can look at the same people as either heroes or villains, it happens every day.

That whole politically correct sjw opinion policing bullshit has corrupted reddit to the core.

0
2

[–] IggyReilly 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

My favorite part of any history courses I took in college were the discussions of how people interpreted history. Not to argue with people, but to hear the different interpretations, sort of like a CMV.

0
18

[–] billdinghy 0 points 18 points (+18|-0) ago  (edited ago)

LOL for christ's sake, not only did he make OP write an essay, but it had to toe the line of a particular, quite possibly revisionist, point of view. These people make me physically sick

0
4

[–] harris 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

It feels like they know its going to get screenshot, how can you not when the Planetside one just got to the front page. Just odd people feeding off online power/drama

0
2

[–] GoingHamilton 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Wait, what Planetside screenshot are you talking about?

0
11

[–] GenghisSean 0 points 11 points (+11|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Can anyone provide some ELI5 historical context?

0
12

[–] Patchface- 0 points 12 points (+12|-0) ago 

I know a little, and some might be wrong, but I'll try.

First off, you know DiCaprio's character from Blood Diamond? In the beginning of the film he says he's from "Rhodesia" while Jennifer Connely's character is like, "Don't we say Zimbabwe now?" and Leo kinda gives a huff look. That's a precursor to Leo's character being morally absent and racist. The history of Rhodesia.

It was founded as a british colony, but after WWII everyone agreed no more colonies. Africa was special. You had the white minority elite ruling the black majority. The british had a rule saying, you're not a country until the black majority are accurately represented (given control). Rhodesia, in an act of defiance, declared independence from England. The white guys (Ian Smith) keeping and maintain power. The blacks, understandably upset, revolted causing The Bush War.

The powerful white did a lot of bad stuff to all blacks, even villagers just trying to feed their families. What's bad is no other country recognized Rhodesia, thus you can't get passports. You couldn't leave the country if you wanted to.

For 15 years Ian Smith kept control of the country using violence and fear tactics until he eventually succumbed to the UK and the UK held supervised elections. Of course, the blacks won and now we have Zimbabwe.

2
10

[–] UberActivist 2 points 10 points (+12|-2) ago  (edited ago)

I have a feeling OP is full of shit somewhere and not giving us the whole story. According to the mods of the mentioned subreddit, OP as left out a huge chunk of conversation, including the post that the mods deemed was extremely racist; enough to warrant a ban.

Also, I sent this to them just to see what they'd say, and here's a bit of the conversation the mods were having that ended up in my inbox. http://i.imgur.com/7Uvyxir.png http://i.imgur.com/FzW5odQ.png

Not saying I'm siding with either side here.... but you guys are pulling the same shit that everyone on reddit the internet usually does, circlejerking over an issue.

Please, for the love of god, don't believe everything you read on reddit or voat. LOOK INTO IT before boarding the circlejerk train and/or sharpening your pitchforks.

Edit: Also, this is apparently the thread the mods linked the person in OP's picture to: http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2nmc4j/was_rhodesia_as_racist_as_south_africa/cmf8atp

0
8

[–] taxation_is_slavery 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago 

I don't see any racism whatsoever in those threads. The mods of /r/history have SJW cognitive dissonance.

0
5

[–] Sibyl 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

Wow! Thanks for looking into this! It seems like most of the time when these "crazy mod" posts surface on voat, the mods did react somewhere from a little to a lot weirdly but the user in question did in fact do what they were accused of. I was a little skeptical the minute he did not post his messages to the mods.

0
0

[–] Goddammit 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Can you point out what section the mods were talking about? I read through a bunch of the thread and it seemed generally unbiased. The comments in the thread seemed to think it was a good response as well.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago  (edited ago)

[Deleted]

0
1

[–] SmilingButtHole 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

It takes a few seconds to make a new account. I doubt anyone made one that wasnt sarcastic

0
1

[–] source 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

I'd like to read some as well. It'd be great if someone could write one with a code in it, like an old school rick roll or something.

0
4

[–] RainWindowCoffee 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Banning people who offer dissenting opinions does not help support the legitimacy of their view point :(

0
4

[–] patjd 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

What kool-aid are these people drinking?!

load more comments ▼ (13 remaining)