An economics, investment, trading and policy blog with a focus on Modern Monetary Theory (MMT). We seek the truth, avoid the mainstream and are virulently anti-neoliberalism.
The only encouraging thing was that the crowd didn't show any support for the bigoted dimwit or Trump's dogwhistle answer.
New Hampshire's philosophy of "Don't Tread on Me" may explain the lack of enthusiasm for targeting religious minorities, or perhaps Trump's supporters prefer a more elevated bigotry than was displayed by the questioner.
The audience looks like a KuKluxKlan convention of white people but according to the census bureau, that is just the way New Hampshire is,
91.3% "White" 1.5% "Black" .3% Asian Multi 1.6%
Foreign born only 5.4%
If I were from the UAE, how would I categorize myself? Black, White or Asian? Sort of wedged right in the middle and the skin color and features are typically sort of a mix. Americans must hate that. So hard to categorize. Goofy census system doesn't categorize by nationality but by old fashioned racial stereotypes from the 1900s cringe worthy. At least the government doesn't use the N-word or call "Asians" orientals. Not far from it though.
New Hampshire's ethic breakdown is very similar to my home county of (old) Hampshire, (old) England.
I've always wanted to go to New Hampshire just to use that line: "I'm from old Hampshire, old England. The original Hampshire in the original England. And I'm here to demand that you cease and desist using the name Hampshire, you disloyal, mutinous brigands!"
Looks like the famed melting point hasn't brought to simmer in New Hampshire and a few other states - Wyoming also looks painfully monochromatic.
Tom: "That's a big reason why Jesus is depicted as white and no one has noticed a contradiction."
Eh? White as in white European, or white as in caucasoid? Caucasoid, yes; but Jesus or anyone in the Bible have never been depicted as anything but white European. You may just about be able to explain away the white skin, but the blonde (or very light brown) hair and usually blue (sometimes pale green) eyes are impossible to explain in these depictions.
Anyone who had been to the Middle East would have known that Jesus had a slightly darker skin tone than the average white European. He'd have looked then just as a modern Palestinian does today. The stained glass and iconography artisans may not have travelled much, but the church bigwigs would have done and would have known otherwise, as would anyone who made a pilgrimage to the Holy Land.
Depicting Jesus as a dark haired, dark eyed and dark skinned man with a dark beard in a robe and a headdress would have freaked people out, just as it probably would today. He'd look like an Arab! He also spoke a language, Aramaic, which is somewhat similar to Arabic, and his cultural and religious practices weren't all that different to those found in Arab Islamic countries today. The Orientalist mindset of superiority probably accounts for the depictions. Culture was an important factor in getting Europeans behind the imperial mission. Depict Jesus as an inferior Arab and the cultural and racial superiority becomes hard to justify.
That's a late development in Christianity, which was initially centered in the Levant while most of Western Europe was pagan. The Roman Church promulgates its centrality from the beginning, but that is just not true. Orthodox Christianity has a better claim to being apostolic in my view.
Jesus is depicted with dark hair and olive skin in many Orthodox icons. The Rus were not converted by the Byzantine Church (Constantinople) until the 10th century.
The Nordic Jesus with blonde hair and blue eyes was largely a Protestant creation, that is, post 16th century.
6 comments:
That was in New Hampshire. I'm ashamed for my state.
The only encouraging thing was that the crowd didn't show any support for the bigoted dimwit or Trump's dogwhistle answer.
New Hampshire's philosophy of "Don't Tread on Me" may explain the lack of enthusiasm for targeting religious minorities, or perhaps Trump's supporters prefer a more elevated bigotry than was displayed by the questioner.
The audience looks like a KuKluxKlan convention of white people but according to the census bureau, that is just the way New Hampshire is,
91.3% "White"
1.5% "Black"
.3% Asian
Multi 1.6%
Foreign born only 5.4%
If I were from the UAE, how would I categorize myself? Black, White or Asian? Sort of wedged right in the middle and the skin color and features are typically sort of a mix. Americans must hate that. So hard to categorize.
Goofy census system doesn't categorize by nationality but by old fashioned racial stereotypes from the 1900s cringe worthy. At least the government doesn't use the N-word or call "Asians" orientals. Not far from it though.
New Hampshire's ethic breakdown is very similar to my home county of (old) Hampshire, (old) England.
I've always wanted to go to New Hampshire just to use that line: "I'm from old Hampshire, old England. The original Hampshire in the original England. And I'm here to demand that you cease and desist using the name Hampshire, you disloyal, mutinous brigands!"
Looks like the famed melting point hasn't brought to simmer in New Hampshire and a few other states - Wyoming also looks painfully monochromatic.
Tom: "That's a big reason why Jesus is depicted as white and no one has noticed a contradiction."
Eh? White as in white European, or white as in caucasoid? Caucasoid, yes; but Jesus or anyone in the Bible have never been depicted as anything but white European. You may just about be able to explain away the white skin, but the blonde (or very light brown) hair and usually blue (sometimes pale green) eyes are impossible to explain in these depictions.
Anyone who had been to the Middle East would have known that Jesus had a slightly darker skin tone than the average white European. He'd have looked then just as a modern Palestinian does today. The stained glass and iconography artisans may not have travelled much, but the church bigwigs would have done and would have known otherwise, as would anyone who made a pilgrimage to the Holy Land.
Depicting Jesus as a dark haired, dark eyed and dark skinned man with a dark beard in a robe and a headdress would have freaked people out, just as it probably would today. He'd look like an Arab! He also spoke a language, Aramaic, which is somewhat similar to Arabic, and his cultural and religious practices weren't all that different to those found in Arab Islamic countries today. The Orientalist mindset of superiority probably accounts for the depictions. Culture was an important factor in getting Europeans behind the imperial mission. Depict Jesus as an inferior Arab and the cultural and racial superiority becomes hard to justify.
That's a late development in Christianity, which was initially centered in the Levant while most of Western Europe was pagan. The Roman Church promulgates its centrality from the beginning, but that is just not true. Orthodox Christianity has a better claim to being apostolic in my view.
Jesus is depicted with dark hair and olive skin in many Orthodox icons. The Rus were not converted by the Byzantine Church (Constantinople) until the 10th century.
The Nordic Jesus with blonde hair and blue eyes was largely a Protestant creation, that is, post 16th century.
Post a Comment