lol, that article was written by a wigger trying to push his propaganda.
On the one hand, it confirmed the racial prejudices of Western audiences, namely the Savage Olympics demonstrated "that the white man leads the races of the world, both physically and mentally."
however organizer William John McGee, head of a Smithsonian Institution division at the time, nevertheless concluded that the 1904 Savage Olympics "established in quantitative measure the inferiority of primitive peoples
wikipedia is full of these types of "totally neutral" tangents because 95% of the editors are wiggers
To me it's more a lesson in how the editorial concept of "neutrality" inevitably serves white power, because it results in writing that is afraid to add any valence to the obviously reprehensible. So you have passages like above, where "confirmed the racial prejudices of Western audiences" can be read either as "proved those prejudices to be true" or (correctly) as "confirmed those prejudices because it was a complete fraud designed to do exactly that."
It's hard to prove exactly what the intentions of the writer were without digging into their history, but it's very easy to prove that the results of pursuing "objective neutrality" always ensure that white supremacy has a seat on the board of editors, so to speak.
That reminds of this "performative impartiality" quote by NYT chief White House correspondent Peter Baker:
As reporters, our job is to observe, not participate, and so to that end, I don't belong to any political party, I don't belong to any non-journalism organization, I don't support any candidate, I don't give money to interest groups and I don't vote.
I try hard not to take strong positions on public issues even in private, much to the frustration of friends and family. For me, it's easier to stay out of the fray if I never make up my mind, even in the privacy of the kitchen or the voting booth, that one candidate is better than another, that one side is right and the other wrong.
No Politics Till the 7th Date? How Journalists Try to Stay Impartial - The New York Times
His wife is also a reporter and she often reports on politics. If it's true that they don't discuss politics in the "privacy of the kitchen" - they are some kind of performative freaks. And if they do - he's just a liar.
I like the Pegagogy of the Oppressed and the writings of the Socialist Filmmaker colelctives in Berlin who basically say - what others did say, too - that as journalist and film maker you are a soldier in the war, the war for socialism of the working class. This means you have to be partial partial to the working class and the structures of society, else you are only a negative propagandist furthering the talking points of the capitalists, who print their own news e.g. Springer.
What I love about the WH press core is that most of them would surely proclaim that it's the principle of the thing that they take dictation and make no value judgments. And that's pretty funny because if the phrase is used accurately - it refers to a situation where the speaker loses something (very) important (like their job) by having principles.
But when the WH reporters say "I can't take a stand" - they can continue to be access journalists to continue their virtuous cycle of making progress in their job, getting on tv, selling their books, making progress in their job, etc...
that guy sounds mental
clear your mind, think nothing, be a good himbo
It’s hard to prove exactly what the intentions of the writer were
no it's not
the repetitive emphasis on how "so and so totally legit scientist" actually "proved the primitive races were inferior to the white race" makes it extremely clear what the writer's intentions are.
Ultimately, the event was "poorly organized" and "plainly a shambles," however organizer William John McGee, head of a Smithsonian Institution division at the time, nevertheless concluded that the 1904 Savage Olympics "established in quantitative measure the inferiority of primitive peoples…in that coordination of mind and body which seems to mark the outcome of human development and measure the attainment of human excellence."[13]
I disagree. In the full context, once again one can read it multiple ways. One can read it the way you have, where McGee's "credentials" are emphasized, or you can read it in a way that emphasizes his obvious self-serving bias as the organizer of the disgusting spectacle. And the citation that the portion of the article points to is plainly left-wing as well.
Exhibition organizers hoped to demonstrate to the world that ethnic groups could be definitively ranked according to biological and cultural markers of civilization –– and that in this ranking, the United States came out on top. To accomplish this goal, they turned to a perhaps unusual tool: sports. Products and proponents of the masculine-coded, hyper-militaristic ideology of American imperialism, the Fair organizers believed that athletic competitions among the inhabitants of the “living exhibitions” could serve as a useful microcosm for testing the martial worth of a nation at the level of the individual (male) citizen.
But really that's my point: it doesn't even matter if the person who wrote that portion is a Nazi or not, because writing in a way that belies any sort of opinion, even one as basically acceptable as "white supremacy is bad and unscientific" is verboten on Wikipedia. And without being allowed to establish a moral standard as basic as that, most writing on Wikipedia will allow readers to interpret racists as correct if they have any such inclination.
"There's white people and there's wiggas, and the wiggas have got to go"
-Chris Rock
in reality, "wignat" is a term used to refer to the most far right sect of poltards, and it stems from the phrase "wigger nationalist". So I just call them wiggers.
Pretty sad that China is putting them in labor camps tho......
"Uyghur Fred Durst" sounds like a fake Cumtown bit generated by an algorithm
the entire thing is just a pronunciation misunderstanding
also it's not racist because even they call themselves "wignats" :^)
1904
That's really not that long ago when you think about it. It's not like 1860 or something.
Technically it's still within living memory:
Kane Tanaka (田中カ子, Tanaka Kane) (born Kane Ota; 2 January 1903) is a Japanese supercentenarian, who (at age 118 years, 211 days[2]) is the world's oldest verified living person.
The thing about St. Louis as a city is that it peaked right around then. Now it's just a conglomeration of gentrified neighborhoods that charge different prices for food based on the atmosphere they are trying to cultivate.
My limited experience there was that the only common thread that people had that lived there was the sports teams.
Pretty much all of their history is racist and the young people avoid that stuff while the chuds eat it up
I thought anthropology did a 180 in the last 60 years and became one of the better university departments in contemporary times
It's become a lot better than it once was, but let's be real: all anthropology does and achieves is creating more anthropology professors to menace everyone else on campus.
Yes, I do think anthropology went from "let us euros study the savages" type of thing to helping us understand the true diversity of the human experience. Particularly useful in debunking notions of "muh human nature" and "there are only 2 genders and every society ever has viewed it this way" sort of things.
Tug of war seems pretty fun except for the amputations and shit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4AhABManTw This video is worth a watch
Edit: BIG TW for gore
So "savage olympics" (spit) aside, this looks like a cool event:
Australia (3)Austria (2) Canada (56) Cuba (3) France (1) Germany (22) Great Britain (6) Greece (14) Hungary (4) South Africa (8) Switzerland (2) United States (526) (host)What a joke
