Photographers of color

[MattKing]

Section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms:
2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:

(a) freedom of conscience and religion;

(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;

(c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and

(d) freedom of association.

and,
Section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms:
7. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.

To a great extent, the Charter is an enhancement to the previously existing Canadian Bill of Rights and, more importantly, a codification of the existing common law.
There are limits to all of the rights contained in the Charter - the phrase being contained in Section 1:
1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.

And yes, the country as a whole is not free from problems.
Those police in Montreal are subject to the Quebec and Montreal authorities. Behavior like that, if accurately reported, would not be countenanced in most of the country, and I will be surprised if it is countenanced there.

 

[Craig75]

while this might be true since 2014.... for 1000years +. people who weren't white christian heterosexual male were beaten, raped, imprisoned, enslaved, tortured, burned at the stake, crucified, murdered, and other things the list is too long to type. I don't really think white christian heterosexual males have much to worry about seeing they run the planet earth, and are the ruling majority in this country and doing everything they can to insure they stay in power for as long as possible.
its too bad people can't just be nice.

In the UK, white christian males ruled over other white christian males with an iron rod in a rigged democracy (literally rigged - read about rotten buroughs) where millions of poor white christian males could not even vote until after WW1.

These kinds of broad strokes are a massive distortion of history.

 

[removed account4]

In the UK, white christian males ruled over other white christian males with an iron rod in a rigged democracy (literally rigged - read about rotten buroughs) where millions of poor white christian males could not even vote until after WW1.

These kinds of broad strokes are a massive distortion of history.

yes I know that stinks and I never even suggested it didn't happen. people in power want to stay in power ( at all costs ). but I am speaking in poor generalities to make a point .. complaining about 7 years of the liberal media ruining the HCWM World is nothing compared to the centuries of the HCWM running amok on every continent.
its too bad people just can't be nice...

 

[Craig75]

yes I know that stinks and I never even suggested it didn't happen. people in power want to stay in power ( at all costs ). but I am speaking in poor generalities to make a point .. complaining about 7 years of the liberal media ruining the HCWM World is nothing compared to the centuries of the HCWM running amok on every continent.
its too bad people just can't be nice...

In the case of British Colonialism, in many cases this was actually corporations taking over foreign lands - eg Lord Lugard and Cecil Rhodes. Was it HCWM or jackboot capitalism? The city of Mekenes in Morocco was partially built with white slaves and North Africans were feared naval opponents. However, one argument is that north african international slavery, shipping, and colonisation could not expand at the rate of western europe because it requires a lot of capital and this needed stock markets which werent allowed in North African islam (and also treated with great suspicion in parts of Europe eg Germany) whereas the UK was far more open to the concept of a stockmarket. The british didnt take over the world because they were better warriors, better tacticians - it is because corporations had access to stock market capital that allowed "innovations" such as the machine gun that ran riot against traditional cavalary battalians in deserts and the capital to launch intercontintental corporate armies. That is an argument I have seen used both by Carribbean marxists and capitalists - and there seems a lot of validity in it.

In the case of USA, in the 50s you had left wing / socialist / marxist film makers forced out of hollywood. By the 60s you had the CIA funding US communist painters to use as unwitting pawns against international communism. USA is probably the most slippery of all places to define in any way shape or form as the game continually evolves in the most complicated ways

 

[removed account4]

USA is probably the most slippery of all places to define in any way shape or form as the game continually evolves in the most complicated ways

AMEN ! ... pretty much no one is free of guilt whole world's been a mess since we were in the caves

 

[BrianShaw]

AMEN ! ... pretty much no one is free of guilt whole world's been a mess since we were in the caves

Even earlier than that... since we started wearing fig leaves!

 

[Cholentpot]

In the case of British Colonialism, in many cases this was actually corporations taking over foreign lands - eg Lord Lugard and Cecil Rhodes. Was it HCWM or jackboot capitalism? The city of Mekenes in Morocco was partially built with white slaves and North Africans were feared naval opponents. However, one argument is that north african international slavery, shipping, and colonisation could not expand at the rate of western europe because it requires a lot of capital and this needed stock markets which werent allowed in North African islam (and also treated with great suspicion in parts of Europe eg Germany) whereas the UK was far more open to the concept of a stockmarket. The british didnt take over the world because they were better warriors, better tacticians - it is because corporations had access to stock market capital that allowed "innovations" such as the machine gun that ran riot against traditional cavalary battalians in deserts and the capital to launch intercontintental corporate armies. That is an argument I have seen used both by Carribbean marxists and capitalists - and there seems a lot of validity in it.

In the case of USA, in the 50s you had left wing / socialist / marxist film makers forced out of hollywood. By the 60s you had the CIA funding US communist painters to use as unwitting pawns against international communism. USA is probably the most slippery of all places to define in any way shape or form as the game continually evolves in the most complicated ways

It's also a very large country made up of a bunch of States who define their own culture and laws.

 

[MattKing]

It's also a very large country made up of a bunch of States who define their own culture and laws.

Whether or not the culture happens to be representative of the majority of their own population .

 

[Cholentpot]

Whether or not the culture happens to be representative of the majority of their own population .

Like California where they're trying to recall their Governor but ya know, they need to verify the signatures because who knows if those people are real.

 

[MattKing]

Like California where they're trying to recall their Governor but ya know, they need to verify the signatures because who knows if those people are real.

Hasn't the rest of the USA been saying that about Californians for years?

 

[Cholentpot]

Hasn't the rest of the USA been saying that about Californians for years?

I'm from the Great Lakes region. You want our water? Move here.

But back on track. I don't think race or even economic background holds people back from being a successful photographer. I think lack of talent holds people back.

 

[removed account4]

But back on track. I don't think race or even economic background holds people back from being a successful photographer. I think lack of talent holds people back.

this might be true now. but now hasn't been a very long time

 

[Cholentpot]

this might be true now. but now hasn't been a very long time

Yes, but we live in the now. And if it's true now, that means we've fixed mistakes of the past and to obsessively dwell on those mistakes is unhealthy. Sometimes the best thing to do is acknowledge the past and move on with resolve not to repeat it.

 

[Craig75]

Yes, but we live in the now. And if it's true now, that means we've fixed mistakes of the past and to obsessively dwell on those mistakes is unhealthy. Sometimes the best thing to do is acknowledge the past and move on with resolve not to repeat it.

if you look at comics, All Negro Comics would come to the stand in the 30s or 40s and would get one issue before it was refused any more distribution. There would not be another mainstream black owned black creator led comics publisher for 50 years. That was a huge manipulation in the market that still has not recovered today as black artists had to work in other fields.

I dont think any two people on this thread would come to a 100% consensus as to what these mistakes even were and personally i think the arguments I have put forward are both right and wrong at the same time. Just saying "oh well its unhealthy to look at it" is a mugs game as personally I think we are seeing history repeat itself but in a different way where the means of distribution were democractised with the internet and then fell straight back into huge corporations who can use them as instruments of mind control / social policy as seen with facebooks experiments on children, rigged search engines, PR firms manipulating wiki, and a zillion other examples.

 

[rorye]

My buddy David Johnson was the first African American to study with Ansel Adams. When David arrived in San Francisco Minor White picked him up at the Ferry Building.

 

[Cholentpot]

if you look at comics, All Negro Comics would come to the stand in the 30s or 40s and would get one issue before it was refused any more distribution. There would not be another mainstream black owned black creator led comics publisher for 50 years. That was a huge manipulation in the market that still has not recovered today as black artists had to work in other fields.

I dont think any two people on this thread would come to a 100% consensus as to what these mistakes even were and personally i think the arguments I have put forward are both right and wrong at the same time. Just saying "oh well its unhealthy to look at it" is a mugs game as personally I think we are seeing history repeat itself but in a different way where the means of distribution were democractised with the internet and then fell straight back into huge corporations who can use them as instruments of mind control / social policy as seen with facebooks experiments on children, rigged search engines, PR firms manipulating wiki, and a zillion other examples.

Social Media will be broken up at some point. Might take a bit of time but it's back to the Ma Bell monopoly. Just because someone has different, or even radically different viewpoints doesn't give the right to de-platform claiming you're a private platform whilst benefiting from public access laws.

I'm not saying things are unhealthy to look at. I'm saying it's unhealthy to dwell on and obsess over. Progress isn't made by the bitter.

 

[removed account4]

Yes, but we live in the now

we sure do, its the best time to be a photographer and the worst time to be a photographer. LOL
signed
a photographer

 

[Cholentpot]

we sure do, its the best time to be a photographer and the worst time to be a photographer. LOL
signed
a photographer

I was a photographer, I still am but I don't get paid for it anymore. Target rich environment these days though, I feel like every time I step out the door I'm documenting history.

 

[Craig75]

Social Media will be broken up at some point. Might take a bit of time but it's back to the Ma Bell monopoly. Just because someone has different, or even radically different viewpoints doesn't give the right to de-platform claiming you're a private platform whilst benefiting from public access laws.

I'm not saying things are unhealthy to look at. I'm saying it's unhealthy to dwell on and obsess over. Progress isn't made by the bitter.

we don't really know what even happened given the very fragmented and far less documented history of photography vs music for example. Progress from what? progress to what?

Your point of view was actually not allowed to be voiced in the later editions of the USA comics code authority guidelines? Did you know that ?

 

[Cholentpot]

we don't really know what even happened given the very fragmented and far less documented history of photography vs music for example. Progress from what? progress to what?

Your point of view was actually not allowed to be voiced in the later editions of the USA comics code authority guidelines? Did you know that ?

Comics suffered from 'Think of the children!' syndrome. A few of Theo's children's books are going through the same thing now.

 

[MattKing]

Comics suffered from 'Think of the children!' syndrome. A few of Theo's children's books are going through the same thing now.

No - Dr. Seuss' books are being looked at with 21st century perspectives, rather than the perspectives from almost 80 years ago.
Some of the early illustrations are offensive to many, many people.
Rather than attempt to edit them, Dr. Seuss' estate has elected to refrain from printing more copies of a few titles.

 

[Cholentpot]

No - Dr. Seuss' books are being looked at with 21st century perspectives, rather than the perspectives from almost 80 years ago.
Some of the early illustrations are offensive to many, many people.
Rather than attempt to edit them, Dr. Seuss' estate has elected to refrain from printing more copies of a few titles.

'A Chinese boy eating with sticks'

Very offensive to point out the culture of China that they use chopsticks.

 

[MattKing]

I'll let people decide for themselves what stereotypic caricatures of themselves that they find offensive.

 

[MartinCrabtree]

 

[guangong]

Every spot on earth has had slavery. Whites were enslaved by Turks in v18th century. China had slavery well into the 20th century and again has slavery for ethnic minorities today, which has been described by by current administration as just a Chinese custom, ok for US and European firms use in China.
The positive side is that very fewer Americans of any race are buying into this latest divisive ploy by a party that has skillfully manipulated racial and ethnic differences since 1825.