Censorship of Huck Finn

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, in the days of Huck Finn, the land had white, black and red people. This book does not touch on the lives of the red man, but they most certainly were not in the minority they are now

It is heartbreaking what happened to the red man. I believe they were more respectable than the whites. I do not believe they were brutal savages. You would be in a lot of trouble if you were to describe Africa as a continent where brutal savages live.

Why don't you give your property back to the Indians? As for Africa, there has been genocide and I, for one, consider that brutal and savage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Historical biases will not go away. I am quite familiar with African history, and have lived in one African country. I am still astounded by what the civilized western nations did to Africa, the extend to which they try and wash away their own responsibility for the problems that they caused that still affect African nations.
The thought of white American people thinking this land belongs to them because they are the best and most deserving is bizarre.
The native american is still waiting to be declared president of the USA. Until then, only the colonialists rule. I cannot help but wonder why nobody could care less that obviously there is more to the story and the red man did not deserve what they got.
White man just know how to swindle, lie and kill

You are ridiculous and outrageous. Humans have a very dark side, and a very dark past. I agree that white people created, for example, the cultural problems between the Hutus and the Tutsis. But those Africans are the ones who actually chose to murder each other in such horrible ways..

did you know:
America would not have the blacks if it was not for the English who broght them over for the White Americans to buy
America would have the red nations, if they had not been killed by the white man, their history is not taught in schools. The schools do not even teach Africas history. For some reason a part of Europes history is taught. Dumb nation to not know its roots.
The folks stolen from Africa did not leave mothers and fathers and children and wiwes behind without them ever mourning their loss.
Africa named Lake Victoria and Victoria Falls after the English Monarch
The English Monarch (Queen Victoria) started the last 'gentlemans war', that ended up being the first war that was photographed (year 1900), and the first a war, and the first war criminal in the true sense of the word was an English Lord.
Queen Victorias grand daughter was the wife of Tsar Nicholas and got shot with her children, English royals cancelled their plans of safe refuge. Some royal jewels belonged to the Romanovs. The biggest diamond in the world was found in South Africa, and made part of the royal jewels. Sacrelidge
So the concentration camps where invented by the Brittish, perfected by the Natzies, and despite that, the annihilation of the red man is never mentioned.

I'd take your history lecture more seriously if you knew how to spell, "sacrilege".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I'd take your history lecture more seriously if you knew how to spell, "sacrilege".

The PP whose spelling you're mocking could say s/he would take your criticism more seriously if you knew how to punctuate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Historical biases will not go away. I am quite familiar with African history, and have lived in one African country. I am still astounded by what the civilized western nations did to Africa, the extend to which they try and wash away their own responsibility for the problems that they caused that still affect African nations.
The thought of white American people thinking this land belongs to them because they are the best and most deserving is bizarre.
The native american is still waiting to be declared president of the USA. Until then, only the colonialists rule. I cannot help but wonder why nobody could care less that obviously there is more to the story and the red man did not deserve what they got.
White man just know how to swindle, lie and kill

You are ridiculous and outrageous. Humans have a very dark side, and a very dark past. I agree that white people created, for example, the cultural problems between the Hutus and the Tutsis. But those Africans are the ones who actually chose to murder each other in such horrible ways..

did you know:
America would not have the blacks if it was not for the English who broght them over for the White Americans to buy
America would have the red nations, if they had not been killed by the white man, their history is not taught in schools. The schools do not even teach Africas history. For some reason a part of Europes history is taught. Dumb nation to not know its roots.
The folks stolen from Africa did not leave mothers and fathers and children and wiwes behind without them ever mourning their loss.
Africa named Lake Victoria and Victoria Falls after the English Monarch
The English Monarch (Queen Victoria) started the last 'gentlemans war', that ended up being the first war that was photographed (year 1900), and the first a war, and the first war criminal in the true sense of the word was an English Lord.
Queen Victorias grand daughter was the wife of Tsar Nicholas and got shot with her children, English royals cancelled their plans of safe refuge. Some royal jewels belonged to the Romanovs. The biggest diamond in the world was found in South Africa, and made part of the royal jewels. Sacrelidge
So the concentration camps where invented by the Brittish, perfected by the Natzies, and despite that, the annihilation of the red man is never mentioned.

From which institution of higher learning were you graduated with a degree in World History?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I'd take your history lecture more seriously if you knew how to spell, "sacrilege".

The PP whose spelling you're mocking could say s/he would take your criticism more seriously if you knew how to punctuate.

Actually that poster knows something about punctuation. Typically one puts a comma between a verb of communication and a quote. Is "spell" a verb of communication? That is a good question.

In short, if she made a mistake, she made a very intelligent one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Why don't you give your property back to the Indians? As for Africa, there has been genocide and I, for one, consider that brutal and savage.

Africa is not a country, it is a continent. By your logic the Europeans are savage because of what happened in Yugoslavia.
I would love to hear more about the rights of the indigenous people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Why don't you give your property back to the Indians? As for Africa, there has been genocide and I, for one, consider that brutal and savage.

Africa is not a country, it is a continent. By your logic the Europeans are savage because of what happened in Yugoslavia.
I would love to hear more about the rights of the indigenous people.

Yes, in some Europeans are savage, Russians, Germans, French, English all but Switzerland have all acted like savages. Thank you so very much for telling me that Africa is a continent though I do not see the necessity as there have been several countries within the Continent of Africe where genocide has been praciced, You appear to be the expert so you should tell me about the rights of the indigenous peoples of the world.

[Anonymous]

New Poster here.

Actually, if you look at Genocides in History, of the nearly 50 cases of genocide, a handful are African. And most of them occurred in four contiguous countries in one part of the Continent (Rwanda, Burundi, Sudan, Uganda).

It is unfair for you to lump Africans together like they are one group of people and make distinctions among Europeans. In fact, Africans are more diverse on many scales than Europeans, it's just that you don't have much knowledge of their cultures. But if you look, for example, at genetics, there is more genetic distance between Africans than between all non-Africans. This is just one way to illustrate how different people are on the continent.

[Anonymous]

Here is the link for Genocides in History
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocides_in_history

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:New Poster here.

Actually, if you look at Genocides in History, of the nearly 50 cases of genocide, a handful are African. And most of them occurred in four contiguous countries in one part of the Continent (Rwanda, Burundi, Sudan, Uganda).

It is unfair for you to lump Africans together like they are one group of people and make distinctions among Europeans. In fact, Africans are more diverse on many scales than Europeans, it's just that you don't have much knowledge of their cultures. But if you look, for example, at genetics, there is more genetic distance between Africans than between all non-Africans. This is just one way to illustrate how different people are on the continent.

I don't know if your problem is that you cannot read or that you cannot comprehend what you read because I worte, "several countries in Africa." How do you deduct from that that I have said that all countries in Africa are guilty of genocide?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I'd take your history lecture more seriously if you knew how to spell, "sacrilege".

The PP whose spelling you're mocking could say s/he would take your criticism more seriously if you knew how to punctuate.

Actually that poster knows something about punctuation. Typically one puts a comma between a verb of communication and a quote. Is "spell" a verb of communication? That is a good question.

In short, if she made a mistake, she made a very intelligent one.

NP here. I don't know about the use of the comma here (but I am skeptical about it) but in the United States, a period goes inside the quote marks (while question marks and exclamation points go outside). Yes, I know that people don't do it that way in other countries (eg, the UK) but that's how it is here. Of course it may have changed in recent years -- given that I have been in the dark about the shift to one space after a sentence, this could have changed too.

[Anonymous]

13:58 back "deduce" not "deduct."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, in some Europeans are savage, Russians, Germans, French, English all but Switzerland have all acted like savages. Thank you so very much for telling me that Africa is a continent though I do not see the necessity as there have been several countries within the Continent of Africe where genocide has been praciced, You appear to be the expert so you should tell me about the rights of the indigenous peoples of the world.

And just about every European country has a place that used to be a battlefield and living space would be very limited if those places were to be preserved
I am not saying African countries are the ones in the world with no problems. Just wodering why the need to call them brutal and savage. After all, Liberia was Americas colony, Portugal had Angola and Mozambique, Germans South West Africa (Namibia) and North East Africa (Tanzania). We must not mention the French.
And definitely not the trouble or the problems some African countries inherited from the English.
It is ironic that you call them brutal and savage. You do not call the English that? Without the English America would not have the blacks. The white man would have had to do his own manual labor

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I'd take your history lecture more seriously if you knew how to spell, "sacrilege".

The PP whose spelling you're mocking could say s/he would take your criticism more seriously if you knew how to punctuate.

Actually that poster knows something about punctuation. Typically one puts a comma between a verb of communication and a quote. Is "spell" a verb of communication? That is a good question.

In short, if she made a mistake, she made a very intelligent one.

NP here. I don't know about the use of the comma here (but I am skeptical about it) but in the United States, a period goes inside the quote marks (while question marks and exclamation points go outside). Yes, I know that people don't do it that way in other countries (eg, the UK) but that's how it is here. Of course it may have changed in recent years -- given that I have been in the dark about the shift to one space after a sentence, this could have changed too.

That is neither comma usage nor an intelligent error to make. I point it out not to put down the poster who made the error, but to say that she/he probably shouldn't be a member of the Spelling Snark Police if she/she is wanted by the Punctuation Police.

[Anonymous]

Who fives a rat's rump about punctuation, grammar, whatever. I started this thread because I am against censorship of any kind. Twain was writing about another time and place and the book depicts the mores of that time. Also, he was condemning slavery. Get back to the subject of "Censorship" of books. This, as I said, was my issue.