Dude. The man just pretended like the Catholic Church hasn't literally wiped out entire cultures. Intentionally. Over hundreds of years. The word "heathen" ring a bell anywhere?
Blasphemy!!! You are anti- western civilization!a fan wrote: ↑Wed Apr 17, 2019 5:19 pmDude. The man just pretended like the Catholic Church hasn't literally wiped out entire cultures. Intentionally. Over hundreds of years. The word "heathen" ring a bell anywhere?
If you're on board with that brand of history, knock yourself out. VDH isn't telling the whole story, and what's more, he knows it.
Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Wed Apr 17, 2019 6:10 pmBlasphemy!!! You are anti- western civilization!a fan wrote: ↑Wed Apr 17, 2019 5:19 pmDude. The man just pretended like the Catholic Church hasn't literally wiped out entire cultures. Intentionally. Over hundreds of years. The word "heathen" ring a bell anywhere?
If you're on board with that brand of history, knock yourself out. VDH isn't telling the whole story, and what's more, he knows it.
Yep. That VDH guy was so unimpressive it was hard to believe.MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 17, 2019 7:29 pmTypical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Wed Apr 17, 2019 6:10 pmBlasphemy!!! You are anti- western civilization!a fan wrote: ↑Wed Apr 17, 2019 5:19 pmDude. The man just pretended like the Catholic Church hasn't literally wiped out entire cultures. Intentionally. Over hundreds of years. The word "heathen" ring a bell anywhere?
If you're on board with that brand of history, knock yourself out. VDH isn't telling the whole story, and what's more, he knows it.
Hanson is a right wing warrior, cloaked in a pretense of intellectualism. His actual intellectual rigor is awful.
Ingraham, on the other hand, is just flat out ignorant and racist, going for the most incendiary to inflame her viewers.
The whole thing is so stupid, as if we actually have to make a binary choice between "Western Civilization is/was all perfect" and "Western Civilization is/was all evil".
History isn't that simple, isn't that binary.
By example, anyone who thinks the Catholic Church hasn't been complicit in, or in some cases the primary driver of, some of the greatest evil doings of man in history is just in ignorant denial. On the other hand, anyone who doesn't recognize that great good has been done by the Catholic Church, inspired millions to do for others, is similarly willfully ignorant.
This attack from the right on universities, and education in general, exposing young people to the full, unvarnished realities of history, good and bad, is truly alarming.
But then, as we've been learning in the current era there is no longer any regard on the right for truth, only what serves one's political or other interest.
Scary stuff, whether coming from the right or from the left.
Truth matters. History matters. The truth about history matters.
History isn't that simple, isn't that binary.
By example, anyone who thinks the Catholic Church hasn't been complicit in, or in some cases the primary driver of, some of the greatest evil doings of man in history is just in ignorant denial. On the other hand, anyone who doesn't recognize that great good has been done by the Catholic Church, inspired millions to do for others, is similarly willfully ignorant.
How 'bout just taking history as it is, without the wasted bandwidth of retroactively judging it by today's standards ?Dude. The man just pretended like the Catholic Church hasn't literally wiped out entire cultures. Intentionally. Over hundreds of years. The word "heathen" ring a bell anywhere?
If you're on board with that brand of history, knock yourself out. VDH isn't telling the whole story, and what's more, he knows it.
“It’s literally a political monument," he said. "All cathedrals are.”
Any rebuilding should be a reflection not of an old France, or the France that never was — a non-secular, white European France — but a reflection of the France of today, a France that is currently in the making. “The idea that you can recreate the building is naive. It is to repeat past errors, category errors of thought, and one has to imagine that if anything is done to the building it has to be an expression of what we want — the Catholics of France, the French people — want. What is an expression of who we are now? What does it represent, who is it for?,” he says.
That's absurd. VDH wasn't invited on to talk about the history lost to that fire. VDH was on that show to take pot shots at those who he thinks want to rewrite history...."the nasty libs". Return fire is fair game...he shot first.Our point----or at least MY point----is that the Catholic Church itself did the exact opposite of what you are counseling here. The Church took culture they found in their Missions over hundreds of years and "judged them by today's standards", deemed them all heathens, and wiped them out.
Man, you're an absolutist. All good or all bad. No nuance. Consider the quote he was asked to respond to.a fan wrote: ↑Wed Apr 17, 2019 10:37 pm
I mean, come on. Can you name another current entity that wiped away more entire freaking cultures/civilizations than the Catholic Church? VDH made the most ironic complaints I've ever heard. Doubly so if you're bookish. It's at least worth a chuckle.
VDH was asked about the irony in the question. Then he went on to explain the irony.a fan wrote: ↑Wed Apr 17, 2019 10:47 pmOur point----or at least MY point----is that the Catholic Church itself did the exact opposite of what you are counseling here. The Church took culture they found in their Missions over hundreds of years and "judged them by today's standards", deemed them all heathens, and wiped them out.
You don't get the irony?
So I'm not making fun of the Church or how it should be rebuilt. I'm making fun of Hanson!
The French people own Notre Dame. They should rebuild the way they wish. Replace it exactly as it was. Add new things. Whatever floats their boats. It's their building. It's going to be "new" construction no matter what they do, yes?
I think we're on the same page....but VDH can't say stuff THAT loaded with irony without expecting an obvious rebuttal.
No! I think that he's on FoxNews, taking potshots at the RollingStone writer....and is too busy doing that to be an honest, big-boy-table historian. Instead, he shows that history takes a backseat to being a dumb*ss FoxNation Republican hack.
.a fan wrote: ↑Wed Apr 17, 2019 11:48 pmNo! I think that he's on FoxNews, taking potshots at the RollingStone writer....and is too busy doing that to be an honest, big-boy-table historian. Instead, he shows that history takes a backseat to being a dumb*ss FoxNation Republican hack.
Example?
When the FoxNation talking head makes fun of the idea making Notre Dame "a gathering house" (her words) rather than a Catholic institution....does VDH respond like a historian, and tell her "actually, part of Notre Dame's rich history is that it was precisely that during the French Revolution..it was renamed "the Cult of Reason", and the "Goddess of Liberty" replaced the Virgin Mary on altars"?
Hell no. That would have, you know, honored the history of the place, and we can't have that when the real goal of the interview is to make fun of the stupid libs for ruining everything. And, you know, Fox views might have learned some actual history from Hanson.
And again, we can't have that, now can we?
So yep, I'm going to hammer Hanson for bemoaning a lack of honoring of history....when he literally does the exact thing he's complaining about. Typical Hanson.
BTW, when Hanson whines about not building stuff like Notre Dame, it really illustrates what a partisan hack he is. Who does he think builds places like Notre Dame? Yep. Big government. Commissioned by Louis VII himself. The very thing he complains about 24-7. But what does he do? He makes it sound like liberals are in the way of building stuff like this.
Tell you what, Hanson. Make folks like Cortez responsible for spending at the Smithsonian. Do you think she'd build more monuments and museums? You bet she would. We stopped building things like the Smithsonian buildings because Republicans thinks public art and culture are bad. So we don't build those things anymore. And, of course for VDH...it's STILL the liberals fault.
. ...he was asked to comment on a specific quote, in a short segment, not to provide a tutorial on Notre Dame.
I really don't care about Hanson. He's a right wing culture warrior wrapping himself in the pretense of intellectualism.old salt wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 1:43 am.a fan wrote: ↑Wed Apr 17, 2019 11:48 pmNo! I think that he's on FoxNews, taking potshots at the RollingStone writer....and is too busy doing that to be an honest, big-boy-table historian. Instead, he shows that history takes a backseat to being a dumb*ss FoxNation Republican hack.
Example?
When the FoxNation talking head makes fun of the idea making Notre Dame "a gathering house" (her words) rather than a Catholic institution....does VDH respond like a historian, and tell her "actually, part of Notre Dame's rich history is that it was precisely that during the French Revolution..it was renamed "the Cult of Reason", and the "Goddess of Liberty" replaced the Virgin Mary on altars"?
Hell no. That would have, you know, honored the history of the place, and we can't have that when the real goal of the interview is to make fun of the stupid libs for ruining everything. And, you know, Fox views might have learned some actual history from Hanson.
And again, we can't have that, now can we?
So yep, I'm going to hammer Hanson for bemoaning a lack of honoring of history....when he literally does the exact thing he's complaining about. Typical Hanson.
BTW, when Hanson whines about not building stuff like Notre Dame, it really illustrates what a partisan hack he is. Who does he think builds places like Notre Dame? Yep. Big government. Commissioned by Louis VII himself. The very thing he complains about 24-7. But what does he do? He makes it sound like liberals are in the way of building stuff like this.
Tell you what, Hanson. Make folks like Cortez responsible for spending at the Smithsonian. Do you think she'd build more monuments and museums? You bet she would. We stopped building things like the Smithsonian buildings because Republicans thinks public art and culture are bad. So we don't build those things anymore. And, of course for VDH...it's STILL the liberals fault.
He was contesting the opinion of another academic who the RS deemed worthy of quoting.
He pointed how long it has been since something like Notre Dame was built in the west, compared to the rest of the world.
Our big gubments build NFL & MLB stadiums with retractable roofs & luxury boxes, ...with hot tubs.
Not unlike Notre Dame during the French Revolution. ...& gubment need not fund it. Look at the tide of deductible donations for ND 2.0.
He was making the same point about the stewardship of our heritage, as the Slate article I posted.
You may not like the message, but it is accurate.
Cortez ? What do you expect from the namesake of a Conquistador who burned his ships before exterminating an indigenous civilization.
If you think VDH is an apologist for W Civ & Catholicism, read his chronicle of the conquests of Cortez in Carnage and Culture.
Happy Columbus Day. Let's go tear down some statues.
Seems to me a fan has done an excellent job of explaining this nuance.old salt wrote: ↑Wed Apr 17, 2019 10:10 pmHistory isn't that simple, isn't that binary.
By example, anyone who thinks the Catholic Church hasn't been complicit in, or in some cases the primary driver of, some of the greatest evil doings of man in history is just in ignorant denial. On the other hand, anyone who doesn't recognize that great good has been done by the Catholic Church, inspired millions to do for others, is similarly willfully ignorant.How 'bout just taking history as it is, without the wasted bandwidth of retroactively judging it by today's standards ?Dude. The man just pretended like the Catholic Church hasn't literally wiped out entire cultures. Intentionally. Over hundreds of years. The word "heathen" ring a bell anywhere?
If you're on board with that brand of history, knock yourself out. VDH isn't telling the whole story, and what's more, he knows it.
Take the good with the bad. Learn from both. Try to repeat what works & avoid repeating what does not.
The fact that you guys summarize Hanson's view of the historical contributions & flaws of the Catholic Church, based on his few words in that clip, reveals how reflexively judgmental & close minded you are.
MDLF76 & afan -- this is the specific quote that VDH was replying to.
Do you agree with this quote more than VDH's reply to it ?
If so, tell us how the Cathedral should be rebuilt.
Should it be rebuilt, given all the past evil doings of the Catholic Church ?
Why glorify such evil ?“It’s literally a political monument," he said. "All cathedrals are.”
Any rebuilding should be a reflection not of an old France, or the France that never was — a non-secular, white European France — but a reflection of the France of today, a France that is currently in the making. “The idea that you can recreate the building is naive. It is to repeat past errors, category errors of thought, and one has to imagine that if anything is done to the building it has to be an expression of what we want — the Catholics of France, the French people — want. What is an expression of who we are now? What does it represent, who is it for?,” he says.
Two private French citizens have already contributed $300MM to the rebuild.MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:20 amSeems to me a fan has done an excellent job of explains this nuance.old salt wrote: ↑Wed Apr 17, 2019 10:10 pmHistory isn't that simple, isn't that binary.
By example, anyone who thinks the Catholic Church hasn't been complicit in, or in some cases the primary driver of, some of the greatest evil doings of man in history is just in ignorant denial. On the other hand, anyone who doesn't recognize that great good has been done by the Catholic Church, inspired millions to do for others, is similarly willfully ignorant.How 'bout just taking history as it is, without the wasted bandwidth of retroactively judging it by today's standards ?Dude. The man just pretended like the Catholic Church hasn't literally wiped out entire cultures. Intentionally. Over hundreds of years. The word "heathen" ring a bell anywhere?
If you're on board with that brand of history, knock yourself out. VDH isn't telling the whole story, and what's more, he knows it.
Take the good with the bad. Learn from both. Try to repeat what works & avoid repeating what does not.
The fact that you guys summarize Hanson's view of the historical contributions & flaws of the Catholic Church, based on his few words in that clip, reveals how reflexively judgmental & close minded you are.
MDLF76 & afan -- this is the specific quote that VDH was replying to.
Do you agree with this quote more than VDH's reply to it ?
If so, tell us how the Cathedral should be rebuilt.
Should it be rebuilt, given all the past evil doings of the Catholic Church ?
Why glorify such evil ?“It’s literally a political monument," he said. "All cathedrals are.”
Any rebuilding should be a reflection not of an old France, or the France that never was — a non-secular, white European France — but a reflection of the France of today, a France that is currently in the making. “The idea that you can recreate the building is naive. It is to repeat past errors, category errors of thought, and one has to imagine that if anything is done to the building it has to be an expression of what we want — the Catholics of France, the French people — want. What is an expression of who we are now? What does it represent, who is it for?,” he says.
Here's where I come down: If Notre Dame is to be 100% rebuilt and financially maintained by the Catholic Church and its adherents, great. If it's going to be 100% supported by the general populace's taxes, it needs to (continue) to be also a secular space.
But it's inevitably going to be a mix, so both elements should be represented.
YEPMDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:15 amI really don't care about Hanson. He's a right wing culture warrior wrapping himself in the pretense of intellectualism.old salt wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 1:43 am.a fan wrote: ↑Wed Apr 17, 2019 11:48 pmNo! I think that he's on FoxNews, taking potshots at the RollingStone writer....and is too busy doing that to be an honest, big-boy-table historian. Instead, he shows that history takes a backseat to being a dumb*ss FoxNation Republican hack.
Example?
When the FoxNation talking head makes fun of the idea making Notre Dame "a gathering house" (her words) rather than a Catholic institution....does VDH respond like a historian, and tell her "actually, part of Notre Dame's rich history is that it was precisely that during the French Revolution..it was renamed "the Cult of Reason", and the "Goddess of Liberty" replaced the Virgin Mary on altars"?
Hell no. That would have, you know, honored the history of the place, and we can't have that when the real goal of the interview is to make fun of the stupid libs for ruining everything. And, you know, Fox views might have learned some actual history from Hanson.
And again, we can't have that, now can we?
So yep, I'm going to hammer Hanson for bemoaning a lack of honoring of history....when he literally does the exact thing he's complaining about. Typical Hanson.
BTW, when Hanson whines about not building stuff like Notre Dame, it really illustrates what a partisan hack he is. Who does he think builds places like Notre Dame? Yep. Big government. Commissioned by Louis VII himself. The very thing he complains about 24-7. But what does he do? He makes it sound like liberals are in the way of building stuff like this.
Tell you what, Hanson. Make folks like Cortez responsible for spending at the Smithsonian. Do you think she'd build more monuments and museums? You bet she would. We stopped building things like the Smithsonian buildings because Republicans thinks public art and culture are bad. So we don't build those things anymore. And, of course for VDH...it's STILL the liberals fault.
He was contesting the opinion of another academic who the RS deemed worthy of quoting.
He pointed how long it has been since something like Notre Dame was built in the west, compared to the rest of the world.
Our big gubments build NFL & MLB stadiums with retractable roofs & luxury boxes, ...with hot tubs.
Not unlike Notre Dame during the French Revolution. ...& gubment need not fund it. Look at the tide of deductible donations for ND 2.0.
He was making the same point about the stewardship of our heritage, as the Slate article I posted.
You may not like the message, but it is accurate.
Cortez ? What do you expect from the namesake of a Conquistador who burned his ships before exterminating an indigenous civilization.
If you think VDH is an apologist for W Civ & Catholicism, read his chronicle of the conquests of Cortez in Carnage and Culture.
Happy Columbus Day. Let's go tear down some statues.
What does matter is the really dumb propaganda being spewed on Fox, to which he is contributing. It's why he was there, it's what they obviously had prepared him to say, and he spewed right along with Ingraham, though with more intellectual pretense.
And you're contributing to the same ignorance.
I do wholly agree, as I had said earlier, that history is complex, not binary, and we need to pay attention to the nuance.
But then you turn around and say, sneeringly, that governments are funding stadiums not cathedrals. That's of course true. But the US has never been a funder of cathedrals (though we have provided tax status to religious groups that can then own land, buildings, and even businesses without paying taxes).
But this is more complex...politicians and rulers have always 'paid the bank'. The Catholic Church was effectively 'the bank' for many of the kings and queens of Europe, certainly of France. In America we live in a world of crony capitalism. No surprise how that translates to stadiums. In both, the rulers are seeking to pretend they are doing something for 'the people' but in reality they're doing it for their bankers.
So he invented this conceptWe’re here to celebrate Opportunity Zones. And who would have thought this was going to be so successful? Who would have thought? When we first proposed the idea, they said, “Well things like this have been talked about but it never happened.” But the numbers are incredible — what’s happened in a very short period of time. It’s really a crucial part of our new tax law to help low-income Americans.
What's the immediate benefit for investing in these areas? How does making the cap gain rate for long term investments zero incent investors to risk capital? Sounds like a pretty good deal for real estate investors.In order to revitalize these areas, we’ve lowered the capital gains tax for long-term investment in Opportunity Zones all the way down to a very big, fat, beautiful number of zero. (Applause.) Zero. That’s why they’re looking and they’re saying, “No, I don’t want to go there. Maybe I don’t love the location. I don’t want to go.” And then they hear about the zero, and they’ll say, “I think I’m going to go there.” (Laughter.) And then they start liking the location, right? Our great football player. You are some player, huh? I’ll never fight you, I promise. That’ll never happen. Great player.
No clue what is catching on.....sorta like his spin on how well association healthcare plans are doing.Our goal is to rebuild homes, schools, businesses, and communities that need it the most. And we have just — I don’t know, we’ve hit something that’s very unusual. This is a very surprising thing to everybody — even to me, to a certain extent. You know, you do things. Nobody thought it was going to catch on like it’s caught on.
Really unbelievable...... I actually gave an overview of this "reconstituted" program to an advisory board for a local youth program. Same old program that has been around since the early 1980's and it is essentially a program to benefit the gentry class. The concept actually began in England in the 1970s. Development folk love it as it boosts IRR and it generally helps projects that were likely to get done anyway by people that don't need that incentive to make the deal work. If a tax break is the difference between the project surviving or failing, it is not likely to attract financing anyway.foreverlax wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 9:00 am "Opportunity Zones"
So he invented this conceptWe’re here to celebrate Opportunity Zones. And who would have thought this was going to be so successful? Who would have thought? When we first proposed the idea, they said, “Well things like this have been talked about but it never happened.” But the numbers are incredible — what’s happened in a very short period of time. It’s really a crucial part of our new tax law to help low-income Americans.
What's the immediate benefit for investing in these areas? How does making the cap gain rate for long term investments zero incent investors to risk capital? Sounds like a pretty good deal for real estate investors.In order to revitalize these areas, we’ve lowered the capital gains tax for long-term investment in Opportunity Zones all the way down to a very big, fat, beautiful number of zero. (Applause.) Zero. That’s why they’re looking and they’re saying, “No, I don’t want to go there. Maybe I don’t love the location. I don’t want to go.” And then they hear about the zero, and they’ll say, “I think I’m going to go there.” (Laughter.) And then they start liking the location, right? Our great football player. You are some player, huh? I’ll never fight you, I promise. That’ll never happen. Great player.
No clue what is catching on.....sorta like his spin on how well association healthcare plans are doing.Our goal is to rebuild homes, schools, businesses, and communities that need it the most. And we have just — I don’t know, we’ve hit something that’s very unusual. This is a very surprising thing to everybody — even to me, to a certain extent. You know, you do things. Nobody thought it was going to catch on like it’s caught on.
Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 9:30 amReally unbelievable...... I actually gave an overview of this "reconstituted" program to an advisory board for a local youth program two weeks ago.... Same old program that has been around since the early 1980's and it is essentially a program to benefit the gentry class. The concept actually began in England in the 1970s. Development folk love it as it boosts IRR and it generally helps projects that were likely to get done anyway by people that don't need that incentive to make the deal work. If a tax break is the difference between the project surviving or failing, it is not likely to attract financing anyway.foreverlax wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 9:00 am "Opportunity Zones"
So he invented this conceptWe’re here to celebrate Opportunity Zones. And who would have thought this was going to be so successful? Who would have thought? When we first proposed the idea, they said, “Well things like this have been talked about but it never happened.” But the numbers are incredible — what’s happened in a very short period of time. It’s really a crucial part of our new tax law to help low-income Americans.
What's the immediate benefit for investing in these areas? How does making the cap gain rate for long term investments zero incent investors to risk capital? Sounds like a pretty good deal for real estate investors.In order to revitalize these areas, we’ve lowered the capital gains tax for long-term investment in Opportunity Zones all the way down to a very big, fat, beautiful number of zero. (Applause.) Zero. That’s why they’re looking and they’re saying, “No, I don’t want to go there. Maybe I don’t love the location. I don’t want to go.” And then they hear about the zero, and they’ll say, “I think I’m going to go there.” (Laughter.) And then they start liking the location, right? Our great football player. You are some player, huh? I’ll never fight you, I promise. That’ll never happen. Great player.
No clue what is catching on.....sorta like his spin on how well association healthcare plans are doing.Our goal is to rebuild homes, schools, businesses, and communities that need it the most. And we have just — I don’t know, we’ve hit something that’s very unusual. This is a very surprising thing to everybody — even to me, to a certain extent. You know, you do things. Nobody thought it was going to catch on like it’s caught on.
Old News
