Is that all you got out of my post? That I'm outraged that Jews don't get as much appreciation as blacks? There's still 6.5 million of them in our country. I don't think it has anything to do with population figures, it's just the lingering bitterness/cloud of guilt that exists between blacks and whites.

If anything, I'd think the smaller the minority, the more attention that would need be brought to their plight (that is, if I thought these [insert race] History Months were necessary in the first place) since they'd be lacking as much of a voice.

So it has nothing to do with the fact that African-Americans' struggles for civil rights are a major aspect of this country's history? It's just about "lingering bitterness".

That could be true in many cases, but that is certainly not true with regards to the comparison you are discussing here.

And what about Native Americans loss of civil rights at the hands of European settlers? Why does the history of a certain race in America have to be singled out when it still makes up the history of America as a whole (and considering we spent a ton of time on slavery and the Civil War already). White history was a major aspect of our country, and yet the only reason we don't have a white history month is because there's nothing to feel sorry about for whites. White history is American history. Black history is American history. Why are we trying to separate the history of blacks in this country from every other part of this country's history?

To me, black history month is about politicians throwing the likes of Al Sharpton a bone.

That is also something I was trying to say.

While there may be movies about the holocaust, and maybe there is a Jewish month, but I've never heard of it and I doubt I'm the only one. The media definitely publicizes the whole black history month a lot more.

The holocaust also ties in with Hitler, and the war, so there are definitely going to be a lot of movies about it. It's just better movie material.

My main point is that the media doesn't spread the message of the Jews history near as much as African-Americans history. I don't think I've ever seen a TV commercial about jewish history month, I've seen plenty about black history month. And Public schools, at least in my experience, don't educate about Jewish history near as much as they educate about African-Americans.

Good point about Native Americans. They were probably ****ed over more than any race, but not much is said about it. Maybe because there aren't many left, because our ancestors killed so many; and it just had to be done, so **** em, lets throw a holiday for the blacks and just try to forget about the Indians.

I agree. As a matter of fact I do have a good percentage of Native American blood in me, but trying to find out what exact tribe is a whole other story. One thing that annoys me about us Americans is that we feel we have the right to morally judge other countries in the genocides they have committed. Yes, each country does deserve to be brought to justice for their crimes, but us Americans always take the high ground and act as if our history is 100% free from murder, and or genocide. What you said about the Indians is absolutely correct, The Trail of Tears is a perfect example. About 2500-6000 Native Americans died on the Trail of Tears alone. That's not counting the total number of deaths throughout American History(which is very hard to calculate). Anyways.. I guess the point is that us Americans need to think twice before taking the moral high ground in all instances ourselves, seeing as we have committed genocide ourselves.

Your descriptions say it all, African-Americans are unique to the USA and have been heavily discriminated against as a race, they are uniquely American and deserve to be educated about considering the way they've been treated in the past.

The Jewish issue is actually very different and shouldn't really be compared, they are truly an international race and have usually been at the business hub of any society that they have lived in and for that reason especially in Europe, they have been heavily discriminated against! In the USA they've never been treated as slaves and basically suffered the same as any other ethnic group that emigrated there, if you're going to suggest some kind of education for the hardships of American Jews, I suggest you also blow the horn for the Irish, Italian and Polish immigrants of the 20th century as well.

The negro was used as a slave, the native indian robbed of his land, whereas the Jews ended controlling Hollywood.

I don't get your point. You say "we" as if some of us alive now (who take the moral high ground) are at fault for the Trail of Tears or enslavement of blacks.

Why are we responsible for this? I think I have the right to take the moral high ground on genocide in other countries because I have never been involved in the Trail of Tears or slavery. I find both genocide and slavery regardless of what country was involved equally despicable.

That's true, unknown soldier. That's why I said in my first post, "maybe its because I live in America".

"we" weren't responsible or the trail of tears, and "we" weren't responsible for slavery or any of that. So why should we be taught to sympathize with blacks? It's just the polite thing to do I suppose.

First of all, I have never committed genocide.

Second of all, I am as disgusted with the horrors in America's past as I am about modern tragedies in other nations. They are abominations. I am not "forgetting that we committed genocide."

Thirdly. It is not wrong to get on a moral high ground when it is about GENOCIDE. Hell, are we supposed to say, "Well, that's bad and all, but our ancestors screwed up back then so we can't really judge you for killing a huge portion of your own population."

Does that sound correct in any way, shape, or form? No, because it is insane.

Americans are just as capable of committing atrocities as other nations, but that does not mean we need to cut people slack when they are killing/enslaving/starving another people.

I really hope that all makes sense.

"We" many not have personally caused those things but "we" certainly have benefitted from them. The United Sates wouldn't be what it is today if it hadn't had access to free (read: stolen) land and free (read: slave) labor.

Quite sad.

Sad but true.

I'm going to ignore the whole racism / holocaust angle and just add my two cents on this original question.

I don't agree with the black and white nature of the options presented (tee hee). I wouldn't say slavery was at the heart of the Civil War but it was definitely one of the major aspects that hung on the outcome of the war.

My own views, the war happened due to one side feeling a serious threat to the way of life they'd become comfortable with (like the guy from Alabama who wouldn't burn his neighbors property). I'm not denying the slavery was one of the big factors, I just don't think it was the only factor.

Consider the power of the idea of 'freedom' within the US. It's always been a HUGE thing, the States started out because of that desire for 'freedom'. At that point in history these 'free' states that had just recently established their independence from the UK were now on the verge of being forced to accept new forms of political control and apply new social concepts that, within the light of 'freedom', they had the right to refuse.

I don't think it was right for those States to keep slaves (or to fight for the right to continue) so much as I think old people were effing dumb.

Well that's the thing. Slavery was the South basically. Their entire economy was based on farming and cotton trade and stuff and they lacked the technical innovation and industrialization that the North had (and they really had no major cities). So it wasn't just about 'keeping the black man down' or anything (though that certainly was a part of it), they were also very dependent on it for their way of life.

That's exactly what I'm getting at - a 'threat' to the Southern way of life. It wasn't 'they want to take the slaves away' so much as 'they want us to change how we do things and not use slaves anymore'. Slavery was definitely a huge factor but not necessarily the root cause.

My family fought in the American Civil War, on both sides, depending on where they emigrated during the famine. Better than starving to death I guess, getting shot.

I think most fought on the yankee side, because I know a number of them lived in New York andConneticuit.

I think Tuna and Mr Dave are on to something. You can't separate the Southern way of life and Slavery during the time of the Civil War. The war might have been about any number of other factors, but because the south had naturally developed into an area dependent on slave labour, any one of those factors would have likely been deeply defined by slavery.

I mentioned something similiar to this on an earlier post, slavery was the southern way of life it built their economy which was strictly agricultural based and it was totally in contrast to the much richer industralized north. Was war inevitable when the North decreed slavery an abomination and needed to be eradicated? Or was it inevitable when the southern states seceded from the Union?