Was Walt Disney antisemitic?

[G L Wilson]

Tell me what you really believe, not what someone else believes.
Was Walt Disney antisemitic? I believe that he was more than just antisemitic.
I cannot shame his name for policy reasons but he was definitely that which I cannot mention.

[The Atheist]

Tell me what you really believe, not what someone else believes.
Was Walt Disney antisemitic? I believe that he was more than just antisemitic.
I cannot shame his name for policy reasons but he was definitely that which I cannot mention.

Given that there isn't likely to be anyone on the forum who knew him personally, this should be a very short thread.

Although I do find it interesting that you'd raise this subject about a man who's been dead for 45 years, other than to try to tarnish the Disney empire. Whether he was or was not isn't going to matter to old Walt.

Even better, I'd venture that you have no proof yourself, merely parroting what certain people think is evidence, but which without Walt around to rebut it, is merely opinion.

Should I note that making a claim: "he was than antisemitic", then saying you won't back it up with evidence is pretty lousy?

[DocHeart]

Anyone else having a massive deja vu moment?

[zoolane]

Tell me what you really believe, not what someone else believes.
Was Walt Disney antisemitic? I believe that he was more than just antisemitic.
I cannot shame his name for policy reasons but he was definitely that which I cannot mention.

Sorry not discussion stuff with you because you do not answers the questions that someone ask you, after you had discussion with them.

http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showthread.php?t=60639&page=5

[Jack of Hearts]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y00ygpgALi0&feature=related

... Maybe you had to be there...





J

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

You know, I've always heard this about Disney, but I've never really looked into it. Is there any evidence to support the claim that he's anti-Semitic, like there is with Henry Ford?

[OrphanPip]

Walt was fiercely anti-communist in his politics, and as a result he had some association with the anti-semitic politically conservative Motion Picture Alliance for the Preservation of American Ideals.

He also had a reputation for bad personal relationships with the rival animators and studio heads in L.A., like the Fleischer brothers, who were Jewish and his major competitors. I don't think it would be unfair to call him mildly anti-semitic. Of course, Disney's politics come into play with his relationship to the Fleischers as well. Fleischer's Betty Boop cartoons celebrated boozing, sexuality, and embraced African American culture (predominantly Jazz music); none of those things would have made them best friends of Disney even if they were not Jewish.

Edit: As a note, both the Fleischers and Disney embraced racial stereotypes in their work.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Oh, he was racist. Just look at the crows in Dumbo.

[The Atheist]

Oh, he was racist. Just look at the crows in Dumbo.

And yet people made the same claims about the hyenas in Lion King, never mind Walt had been dead for decades even then.

We see what we want to see most of the time.

[OrphanPip]

And yet people made the same claims about the hyenas in Lion King, never mind Walt had been dead for decades even then.

We see what we want to see most of the time.

To be fair, the worse Disney offender is really Song of the South, which contains a depiction of African Americans in the 19th century Southern United States so rosy it boggles the mind.

Disney's tendency to stereotype its villains as racial minorities, and often as effeminate, is broadly found in all American media. I don't think it's a reflection of Disney being a racist corporation. It's more of a tendency of Disney always having been a conservative company that has played it safe for years. They've never done anything daring with their stories, their only innovation lies in the technical aspects.

Edit: Honestly, I don't think there is a single Disney movie where I approve of the message. I don't count the Pixar movies, since they bought that far superior studio.

[MarkBastable]

I was about thirty when it occurred to me that the Dumbo crows were supposed to be black.

[G L Wilson]

And yet people made the same claims about the hyenas in Lion King, never mind Walt had been dead for decades even then.

We see what we want to see most of the time.

"Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners."
1 Corinthians 15: 33

The Lion King has a safe sex message at least, written across the sky, no matter whatever else the film says.

[The Atheist]

"Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners."
1 Corinthians 15: 33

Since we're on biblical quotations, I'll go with the big bloke himself:

Let he without sin cast the first stone.


The Lion King has a safe sex message at least, written across the sky, no matter whatever else the film says.

Well, no. It has nothing to do with safe sex. The word "sex" appears for about the time most teenagers take to do the deed. Hardly promoting safe sex.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

So, are people really suggesting the crows aren't a racist depiction of black people? Maybe you have to be American to get it....

[G L Wilson]

Well, no. It has nothing to do with safe sex. The word "sex" appears for about the time most teenagers take to do the deed. Hardly promoting safe sex.

Look again. The message is definitely SAFE SEX.

[OrphanPip]

It actually says SFX, for special effects, since it was inserted as a tag by the digital animators.

[G L Wilson]

I reckon that a bit of technical manipulation has gone on in the making of the DVD. Boo, hiss. Because the original message definitely spelt SAFE SEX. Now, all Disney has to do is to put back the missing rabbit in Bambi and everything will be perfect like Christmas over at the white folk's place.

[MarkBastable]

So, are people really suggesting the crows aren't a racist depiction of black people? Maybe you have to be American to get it....

Yeah, I think you do. Well, maybe you wouldn't these days, but when I was a kid growing up in a multiracial area of South London, all the black kids I knew spoke like me. And their dads spoke with a Jamaican accent.

I just thought the crows were American.

[MarkBastable]

I reckon that a bit of technical manipulation has gone on in the making of the DVD. Boo, hiss. Because the original message definitely spelt SAFE SEX.

No it didn't. Calm down.

[G L Wilson]

I am not calming down. I'm right.

[OrphanPip]

The crows from Dumbo are such an iconic example of African American representation in animation that have even been emulated by subsequent American animators.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYEkYnXC-qA

Robert Crumb's creations are even more controversial than Disney, since his work is much darker and also coming out of the 70s I think most people get the sense he should have known better. His work has also been accused of being highly misogynistic. Nevertheless, he remains one of the most critically praised and daring cartoonist of the 20th century.

[The Atheist]

Look again. The message is definitely SAFE SEX.

Wrong.

Here's the YouTube video. If you can find the word "safe" anywhere you win a chocolate fish.


It actually says SFX, for special effects, since it was inserted as a tag by the digital animators.

Or that. I've seen that advanced as a possibility as well, but in the original video - which I just watched - it sure looks more like "SEX" than "SFX".

Either way, there's no "safe".


I reckon that a bit of technical manipulation has gone on in the making of the DVD.

No, you're just indulging in selective memory.

And being wrong.

[G L Wilson]

Wrong.

Here's the YouTube video. If you can find the word "safe" anywhere you win a chocolate fish.



Or that. I've seen that advanced as a possibility as well, but in the original video - which I just watched - it sure looks more like "SEX" than "SFX".

Either way, there's no "safe".



No, you're just indulging in selective memory.

And being wrong.

Yep, it could possibly be a false memory. Therefore, Disney has no redeeming features.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

The "SEX" written in the stars of the sky in The Lion King is not the first sexual insert in a Disney film. Off the top of my head, there are also the following (I write confirmed next to those me and my friends personally found when we heard about all this stuff):

The Little Mermaid:


At the wedding between the bad-Ariel and the the prince, the preist pops a boner. Pretty hilarious, really. The makers claim it's his knee, which is a load of crap. (confirmed)
On the cover of the movie when it first came out, one of the spires on the castle in the background is a penis. It was taken out when re-issued, but I still have the case around here somewhere. (definitely confirmed, :laugh:)


Who Framed Roger Rabbit (probably has more than any other):


When the baby walks under the woman after the opening scene, he jabs upwards towards the woman's crotch with his middle finger. You need to watch it in slo-mo to really see it. (confirmed)
After the car crash, Jessica Rabbit's dress parts to reveal what seems to look like pubic hair. (questionable)
During the piano battle between Donald and Daffy Duck, Donald, at one point, seems to say to Daffy, "You goddamn stupid nigger." This can't be confirmed. You can hear it if it's what you want to hear. (questionable)


Some others are Aladdin whispering to Jasmine's lion, "Little kids, take off your pants," or something of that nature (very questionable), and in The Rescuers Down Under while they are flying on the birds back, in one of the windows in the background, you can see the top of a naked woman (confirmed).

[MarkBastable]

I reckon that a bit of technical manipulation has gone on in the making of the DVD. Boo, hiss. Because the original message definitely spelt SAFE SEX.


No it didn't. Calm down.



I am not calming down. I'm right.


Atheist: Here's the YouTube video. If you can find the word "safe" anywhere you win a chocolate fish.


Yep, it could possibly be a false memory.


So you're, er, wrong.

No need to apologise. Your calming down is enough.

[G L Wilson]

You live under an oppressive regime of bourgeois/fascist ideals, release can't come quickly enough as The Atheist shows below.

[The Atheist]

You live under an oppressive regime of bourgeois/fascist ideals, you need a release, Bastable.

http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s97/TheAtheist/funny.gif

That is brilliant!

Completely irrelevant and utterly ridiculous in context, but really funny.

[G L Wilson]

Tell me the difference between Adolf Hitler and Walt Disney, The Atheist, other than one was German and the other was American.

[MarkBastable]

He's right, you know. They both had moustaches.

[Leo Bloom]

He's right, you know. They both had moustaches.

Moustaches? Don't forget Salvador Dali !!! (and his collaboration with WD - Destino)

[Emil Miller]

Tell me the difference between Adolf Hitler and Walt Disney, The Atheist, other than one was German and the other was American.

:smilielol5:

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Has G L Wilson always exhibited troll-like behavior, or is this a new development?

[Buh4Bee]

I think Disney films have a reputation for subliminal messages that young viewers do not necessarily pick up, but adults do. It sort of irritates me that I have to educate my kid before seeing any Disney films. But than again, I think Disney and the films should be understood in terms of an historical perspective as OrphanPip has been so kind to point out.

[The Atheist]

Tell me the difference between Adolf Hitler and Walt Disney, The Atheist, other than one was German and the other was American.

This is not a strong enough response:


:smilielol5:

I was more:

http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s97/TheAtheist/funny.gif

Ok, just a couple of minor differences between Walt and Adolf:

Hitler: Failed Painter/Dictator of Germany
Disney: Businessman/Movie Producer

Hitler: Responsible for war and genocide resulting in ~50,000,000 deaths
Disney: Invented Mickey Mouse

Sorry; I am just asking, but is this thread and your comments in response to the thread on what constitutes trolling? As an example of how to do it, maybe?

What's next? The [late] Queen Mother was a closet lesbian who actually killed Princess Diana for spurning her sexual advances?

[G L Wilson]

Now, who is being ridiculous? I ask you.

[The Atheist]

Now, who is being ridiculous? I ask you.

I'd actually consider the Queen Mother in a conspiracy to be a lot less ridiculous than comparing a mobie producer to one the worst despots in the planet's history, but that's just me.

[Emil Miller]

Tell me the difference between Adolf Hitler and Walt Disney, The Atheist, other than one was German and the other was American.

A moment's reflection would have told you that: 'Heil Disney' doesn't have quite the same ring to it.

[G L Wilson]

Mock me if you like, I stand by all that I have said.

[MarkBastable]

Mock me if you like, I stand by all that I have said.

Except the bit about 'safe sex' appearing in The Lion King. You don't stand by that.

[G L Wilson]

Except the bit about 'safe sex' appearing in The Lion King. You don't stand by that.

Too right, Bastable, I don't. Without evidence, there is no proof.

[MarkBastable]

Too right, Bastable, I don't.

But - just so we're all clear - the idea that there's little to choose between Disney and Hitler: you stand by that.

[G L Wilson]

But - just so we're all clear - the idea that there's little to choose between Disney and Hitler: you stand by that.

Indeed I do. The means to a goal matter not if the goal is the same.

[MarkBastable]

Indeed I do. The means to a goal matter not if the goal is the same.

And the goal of Steamboat Willy was to compensate for the Treaty of Versailles by conquering the whole of Europe and by murdering several million Jews, gypsies and homosexuals. And, obviously, the goal of the Third Reich was to make millions of dollars for a start-up company by amusing people while they were munching popcorn and waiting for the main feature.

[G L Wilson]

And the goal of Steamboat Willy was to compensate for the Treaty of Versailles by conquering the whole of Europe and by murdering several million Jews, gypsies and homosexuals. And, obviously, the goal of the Third Reich was to make millions of dollars for a start-up company by amusing people while they were munching popcorn and waiting for the main feature.

Put that way it does sound silly I know. But I discern no fundamental difference between Malcom X and Martin Luther King Jnr, for example, therefore I am what I am depending on your point of view. I am either mad or perfectly sane.

[MarkBastable]

Put that way it does sound silly I know. But I discern no fundamental difference between Malcom X and Martin Luther King Jnr, for example, therefore I am what I am depending on your point of view. I am either mad or perfectly sane.

I wouldn't call for a vote, if I were you.

[G L Wilson]

I wouldn't call for a vote, if I were you.

Who ever said that this was a democracy?

[Emil Miller]

Put that way it does sound silly I know. But I discern no fundamental difference between Malcom X and Martin Luther King Jnr, for example, therefore I am what I am depending on your point of view. I am either mad or perfectly sane.

It would seem to me that you suffer from the besetting sin of the English and, by extension, the Anglo Saxon race in general, of self-righteousness
which is indeed a form of mental aberration.

[G L Wilson]

It would seem to me that you suffer from the besetting sin of the English and, by extension, the Anglo Saxon race in general, of self-righteousness
which is indeed a form of mental aberration.

I think that you are probably right, Miller, but I can hardly do anything about it if I am.

[MarkBastable]

Who ever said that this was a democracy?

The assessment of madness is absolutely a democracy. If most people reckon you're mad, you are. If most people reckon you're not, you're not.

[BienvenuJDC]

So, are people really suggesting the crows aren't a racist depiction of black people? Maybe you have to be American to get it....

Really? That is FAR fetched. I'm American. I don't get it. Unless YOU are LOOKING for it.

[G L Wilson]

The assessment of madness is absolutely a democracy. If most people reckon you're mad, you are. If most people reckon you're not, you're not.

Then Galileo was mad?

[MarkBastable]

Then Galileo was mad?

You didn't say 'Either I'm right or I'm wrong'. You said, "Either I'm mad or I'm sane."

We'd already decided you were wrong. We we just discussing why you were.

[G L Wilson]

You didn't say 'Either I'm right or I'm wrong'. You said, "Either I'm mad or I'm sane."

We'd already decided you were wrong. We we just discussing why you were.

I don't think anything was decided on the wrongness or rightness of my argument. Now, who is the one with the false memory?

[MarkBastable]

I don't think anything was decided on the wrongness or rightness of my argument.


Oh, I do.

However, is that something you'd be prepared to put to a vote?

[BienvenuJDC]

I don't think anything was decided on the wrongness or rightness of my argument. Now, who is the one with the false memory?

I guess I missed your argument. Did you have one?

[Venerable Bede]

Seriously, even if Walt Disney was a complete anti-Semite, he still wouldn't be on the level of Hitler. Because, you know, he didn't order the deaths of millions. No matter how much he might have hated Jews, he didn't kill any, which makes him way, way out of Hitler's league.

[G L Wilson]

Oh, I do.

However, is that something you'd be prepared to put to a vote?

I don't believe in democracy in matters of conscience, Bastable; but if you feel like having one, feel free.

[MarkBastable]

I guess I missed your argument. Did you have one?


Well, Bienvenue, I think he did, though it was expressed in Wilson's characteristically gnomic way.

However, this is a discussion forum, and i think it's fair to say - as the moderators often do - that there's a kind of limit on how much something can be discussed before it just turns into a trade of contradictions and insults. Then again, it takes a while to bring people around to your view. Exchanges are the vehicle for that process. That's how it works.

So, in order to close this in a civilised fashion, here's what I propose....


Wilson's post, addressed to The Atheist, was this:

Tell me the difference between Adolf Hitler and Walt Disney...other than one was German and the other was American.

..which was later illuminated by

The means to a goal matter not if the goal is the same.


Fair enough. There's the thesis.

I'll set up a poll thread which will ask for a simple Yes/No vote on the following proposition....


There is very little difference between Adolf Hitler and Walt Disney, other than one was German and the other was American. The means to a goal matter not if the goal is the same.

Wilson will post a two hundred word argument in support of that proposition. And Atheist will post a two hundred word argument in opposition to it.

And then the poll will be open for voting.

Now - this may not prove that one person is right and the other is wrong, in the cosmic scheme of things. But it will show which of them can put the more convincing argument, which is what a discussion forum is for.

Atheist - you on?

Wilson - you on?

[G L Wilson]

Go ahead without me, I know the decision already.

[MarkBastable]

Go ahead without me, I know the decision already.

Well, I was going to say that if Atheist didn't want to do it, he could nominate a pinch-hitter in his stead, who was aligned to his position. Would you like to do that?

[G L Wilson]

No, no lawyers. Just do it, set your poll for all the good it will do.

[MarkBastable]

No, no lawyers. Just do it, set your poll for all the good it will do.

That's disappointing. I'd rather hoped that, having put forth a proposition so bold, you'd be prepared to support it. I mean, you know - it's a discussion forum, rather than a statement forum.

Still, I'm sure you know best.

[BienvenuJDC]

Well, asking about a comparison between two men is far from an actual argument.

I'll answer that Walt Disney wasn't a 1) murderer, 2) tyrant, or 3) even a hateful person. I would even go as far to say that he was a philanthropist.

Still waiting for an argument.

[MarkBastable]

I'm sure he has one, and I'm sure he'll present it in the poll thread, if at all. Let's not ask him to pre-empt the rhetoric.

[JBI]

Meh, Americans, and the rest of the world for that matter, were anti-semitic during that period. It wouldn't be surprising that Disney was, lets not forget that it isn't a hit and miss thing, pretty much the whole world harbored hate for the Jews, or lack of understanding at least.

Americans like to hide their dark past by looking for scapegoats of "Extreme bigotry" to cover for a general bigotry. It's no surprise that debates like these can come up - they could come up about 95% of the American public persons of the time, the other 5% being Jewish.

[The Atheist]

Atheist - you on?

Seems too easy to me, but if Wilson's game, I'll have a go.

[BienvenuJDC]

Meh, Americans, and the rest of the world for that matter, were anti-semitic during that period. It wouldn't be surprising that Disney was, lets not forget that it isn't a hit and miss thing, pretty much the whole world harbored hate for the Jews, or lack of understanding at least.

Americans like to hide their dark past by looking for scapegoats of "Extreme bigotry" to cover for a general bigotry. It's no surprise that debates like these can come up - they could come up about 95% of the American public persons of the time, the other 5% being Jewish.

SERIOUSLY? The rest of the world is just as full of the bigotry. The French is full of it, the Germans hate the French, the English think they're better than everyone, the orient....the same. But EVERYONE hates the Americans.......

[MarkBastable]

SERIOUSLY? The rest of the world is just as full of the bigotry.


I think that's pretty much what JBI said, though talking about attitudes at the time, rather than now.


Americans, and the rest of the world for that matter, were anti-semitic during that period...pretty much the whole world harbored hate for the Jews, or lack of understanding at least...It's no surprise that debates like these can come up - they could come up about 95% of the American public persons of the time


...all the salient bits of which, you'll notice, are past tense. The only present tense used concerned the alleged attempt to spin history. No suggestion was made that Americans today are more or less bigoted than anyone else - or, actually, that they've ever been. Quite the opposite, in fact.

[Paulclem]

Is this the training arena for the new sport that is supplanting hare coursing, dog fighting and foxhunting? Troll baiting could be the next big digital bloodsport.

It has been a masterclass of mockery Gentlemen. I trust you can discern the binary sniggers and digital guffaws that have been virtually echoing through the thread.

[G L Wilson]

Seems too easy to me, but if Wilson's game, I'll have a go.

I can't see how you can lose, The Atheist, everyone, who has commented on what I said about Adolf Hitler and Walt Disney being little different, confuses The Holocaust for the only one going around. I think that the public are just not up to thinking seriously about the issue. The Holocaust is a massive impediment in the way of research into the causes of it. The small sample of views that I have collected here convinces me of it.

[The Atheist]

I can't see how you can lose, The Atheist, everyone, who has commented on what I said about Adolf Hitler and Walt Disney being little different, confuses The Holocaust for the only one going around. I think that the public are just not up to thinking seriously about the issue. The Holocaust is a massive impediment in the way of research into the causes of it. The small sample of views that I have collected here convinces me of it.

Yeah, that 6 million dead is hard to sweep under the carpet.

Paul: it's cheaper and less exercise than bear-baiting and it doesn't upset WWF.

[G L Wilson]

Yeah, that 6 million dead is hard to sweep under the carpet.

Paul: it's cheaper and less exercise than bear-baiting and it doesn't upset WWF.

The only ones doing any sweeping around here is the ignorant, The Atheist.

[Emil Miller]

I have tried to treat this thread with the levity that I think it deserves, because I don't see what Disney's views on Jews or anything else has to do with other people. A man has the right say and think what he wants without the lefty thought police burnishing their halos by castigating someone who has been dead for decades. For those who think that Disney's position as a purveyor of public entertainment gives them the right to point the finger, here's an item which may be of interest, the bold type is mine:

Oh brother. This has been brought up and debunked countless times-along with the stupid "frozen" trope. Enough already. It's not "new" or "daring" or even interesting anymore. It's also disgusting to slander a dead man who can't speak for himself.It's impossible to say what thoughts Walt Disney held in his his innermost heart(or for that matter what people walking around today do, all PCness aside). But regardless, what's annoying is the insistence so prevalent nowadays of applying 2009 attitudes to people who lived almost 100 years ago and in a very different society.

It wouldn't be surprising if midwestern farm boy Walt had-or heard-preconceptions about jews who probably weren't in large supply in Marceline MO. On the other hand, the absence of peoples from another culture might have meant that it was a non issue that never came up.

Ethnic stereotyping (eg. the original Big Bad Wolf "jewish peddler" in "Three Little Pigs") was common in all forms of show business entertainment and did NOT mean that the perpetrators were probably "racist" (a word way, way too often tossed around today) OR that they were "anti-semitic"(ditto). It meant they just used common preconceptions that audiences recognized and laughed at, like drunken irishmen and cheap scotsmen-and jewish salesmen or overbearing mamas. In other words there's a BIG difference between evil Naziesque propaganda intended to slur an ethnicity, fomenting hatred for that group, and using common stereotypes (we now recognize as distasteful) for comedy.

As written up in the Wikipedia entry on "Pigs":
it's important to know and understand that at that time, ethnic and racial stereotypes were a staple in Hollywood movies, including those in movies produced by Jews."

Anyway, whatever Walt's upbringing, he fitted into Hollywood as a major producer and public figure who worked side by side and was on familiar terms with the other studio bosses, virtually all of whom were jewish.
Apart from gags all studios used, in the running of his studio there's NO proof that Walt practised discrimination based on anyone's jewish origins. It's absurd to think the Warners, Selznick, Cohn, Mayer and others would have been cool having any dealings with Walt were he a known anti-semite-and word would have privately got around fast if that were true.
Walt employed jewish artists. Everything about him that he said and did suggests he was the sort of man who didn't give a damn what someone's "background" was, only their talents and what they were able to do for him at the Studio.

[The Atheist]

Bravo, Emil!

[Paulclem]

SERIOUSLY? The rest of the world is just as full of the bigotry. The French is full of it, the Germans hate the French, the English think they're better than everyone, the orient....the same. But EVERYONE hates the Americans.......

When you're big and out there, then there will be people who hate you. I mean, who ever says anything about Luxembourgians?

We've all got people hating us. We live next door to the French!

I sometimes ask the Learners in my classes "Who gets picked on in your country?". In India it's Pakistanis. In China it's Mongolians,. In Japan it's Koreans. In African countries it may depend which tribe you come from. In England it's whichever minority seems to be taking jobs...etc etc.

Do we Brits think we're better than everyone else? I think not. We're world leaders in politeness. :D

[MarkBastable]

It's also disgusting to slander a dead man who can't speak for himself


I believe that, strictly speaking, it's impossible to slander a dead man - not because the statute explicitly rules it out, but because the individual slandered has to bring the case, which is difficult when you're deceased.

This message was brought to you by A-Little-Knowledge, Inc: Pedants to the Gentry since 1977.


I mean, who ever says anything about Luxembourgians?

Walloons.

[Emil Miller]

It's also disgusting to slander a dead man who can't speak for himself


I believe that, strictly speaking, it's impossible to slander a dead man - not because the statute explicitly rules it out, but because the individual slandered has to bring the case, which is difficult when you're deceased.

This message was brought to you by A-Little-Knowledge, Inc: Pedants to the Gentry since 1977.

The essence of your post lies in the words "strictly speaking", because most people would realise that slander in this case means calumny: a malicious misrepresentation of the words or actions of another. The Cassell Encyclopaedia Dictionary.

[MarkBastable]

The essence of your post lies in the words "strictly speaking"...


Yep. That's how pedantry works.

Incidentally, I'm impressed. It's pedantry of the highest calibre to bother to look up, copy and reproduce a definition of a common word just to refute an originating pedantry as frivolous and petty as the one I posted. We should have a secret handshake or something.

[Paulclem]

[B]
This message was brought to you by A-Little-Knowledge, Inc: Pedants to the Gentry since 1977.



Walloons.

:lol:

Walloons?

[MarkBastable]

:lol:

Walloons?


Walloons (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walloons).

[Paulclem]

Walloons (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walloons).

Ah Walloons.

You see this is why I like it on here. You can have a laugh, trap a troll and expand your mind; all within the digital confines of a forum. Marvellous.

[Emil Miller]

Yep. That's how pedantry works.

Incidentally, I'm impressed. It's pedantry of the highest calibre to bother to look up, copy and reproduce a definition of a common word just to refute an originating pedantry as frivolous and petty as the one I posted. We should have a secret handshake or something.

Well I do like to be sure of what I'm talking about. It's what I was taught and I can't break the habit.

[Drkshadow03]

Meh, Americans, and the rest of the world for that matter, were anti-semitic during that period. It wouldn't be surprising that Disney was, lets not forget that it isn't a hit and miss thing, pretty much the whole world harbored hate for the Jews, or lack of understanding at least.

Americans like to hide their dark past by looking for scapegoats of "Extreme bigotry" to cover for a general bigotry. It's no surprise that debates like these can come up - they could come up about 95% of the American public persons of the time, the other 5% being Jewish.

Exactly. Too often people only focus on extreme forms of bigotry and pretend that's the only form of real racism (it's only racist if you're going out and killing people or physically harassing them apparently). Idiots who think like this completely miss the fact that discrimination is much more insidious. There isn't really much debate that many of the images that proliferate in Disney's films are clearly racist.

[G L Wilson]

Exactly. Too often people only focus on extreme forms of bigotry and pretend that's the only form of real racism (it's only racist if you're going out and killing people or physically harassing them apparently). Idiots who think like this, completely miss the fact that discrimination is much more insidious. There isn't really much debate that many of the images that proliferate in Disney's films are clearly racist.

I have all the bigotries, just because I am not crude about them doesn't mean that I am not a bigot.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Really? That is FAR fetched. I'm American. I don't get it. Unless YOU are LOOKING for it.

BS. You're telling me this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZIDl8Wb1va0) is only racist if you want to see it as racist? No. It's racist.

[BienvenuJDC]

BS. You're telling me this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZIDl8Wb1va0) is only racist if you want to see it as racist? No. It's racist.

Please explain to me what in that is racist. It is a characterization of a certain culture that ACTUALLY EXISTED.

How is it RACIST?

[G L Wilson]

I love little Dumbo - so cute. Hmmm, I mean...crows? Damn racist.

[OrphanPip]

Please explain to me what in that is racist. It is a characterization of a certain culture that ACTUALLY EXISTED.

How is it RACIST?

To say it was based on a certain culture is a bit inaccurate. The depiction comes out of the standard vaudeville and Hollywood depictions of blacks from the period, they're a cinematic stock character not a depiction of black culture. That is precisely the problem, we conflate a superficial oft repeated stereotype with accurate portrayal. The sass-talking itinerant black vagabonds, which is essentially what the crows are, is part of the same stock tradition as the doting mammy and the lazy servant. These depictions become particularly problematic when we compare them to the conventions of theatrical depictions of slaves and servants going as far back as the Roman Empire. It's bad enough that they reinforce a notion of class based hierarchy, but they also bring race into it; they propagate and reflect superficial expectations of how people behave linked to race.

Also, the script called the lead crow "Jim Crow," which I'm sure the writers thought was hilarious.

[G L Wilson]

Mark Twain showed the influence of old stock types in parts of his work and he could not be called a racist. No, it is the general dreariness of the culture presented and uplifted which is the real problem. Mark Twain had no time for old-time religion, Walt Disney seems to have had plenty.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Thank you, OrphanPip, as you gave a much more eloquent answer than I could have.

I don't get your argument, though,BienvenuJDC. Just because something depicts a culture that exists/existed, it isn't racist, regardless of the accuracy of the depiction? When people wore blackface to depict black people, that isn't racist? When Jews are depicted as being miserly and having big noses, that's not racist (or bigoted)? After all, it's a depiction.

The crows are racist because they are given almost every stereotypical trait that could be applied to a black person. If you can't see that, your looking through rose-colored glasses.

[JuniperWoolf]

I didn't know that the crows were supposed to be black either, I just thought that they were American Southerners. *sigh* There goes another childhood memory, tainted.


We're world leaders in politeness. :D

Hey now, I'm Canadian. We got our sovereignty by asking nicely.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

I don't know if it needs to taint your idea of the crows, Juniper. I doesn't for me, nor do the racism in old Bugs Bunny cartoons. It was just a product of the past. Plus, I don't think the crows were made that way out of any sort of malicious intent.

[OrphanPip]

I don't know if it needs to taint your idea of the crows, Juniper. I doesn't for me, nor do the racism in old Bugs Bunny cartoons. It was just a product of the past. Plus, I don't think the crows were made that way out of any sort of malicious intent.

Exactly, they are part of a cinematic stock character tradition. If we want to look for something that pushes the boundaries of social conventions for its time, Disney isn't the place to look for it. The one true blight on the company's history is Song of the South, which was even criticized for racism at the time it was produced in 1946. Documents surrounding the film made by producers show that the corporation was conscious of racial depictions. One Disney publicist wrote "the negro situation is a dangerous one. Between the negro haters and the negro lovers there are many chances to run afoul of situations that could run the gamut all the way from the nasty to the controversial." The main criticism of that film not being the fact that it negatively depicts black people, but that it seems to depict pre-civil war (or possibly soon after the war) blacks in Georgia living in perfect harmony with their masters. Although, we probably shouldn't expect a detailed exploration of race relations in 19th century America from a children's movie.

[G L Wilson]

Exactly, they are part of a cinematic stock character tradition. If we want to look for something that pushes the boundaries of social conventions for its time, Disney isn't the place to look for it. The one true blight on the company's history is Song of the South, which was even criticized for racism at the time it was produced in 1946. Documents surrounding the film made by producers show that the corporation was conscious of racial depictions. One Disney publicist wrote "the negro situation is a dangerous one. Between the negro haters and the negro lovers there are many chances to run afoul of situations that could run the gamut all the way from the nasty to the controversial." The main criticism of that film not being the fact that it negatively depicts black people, but that it seems to depict pre-civil war (or possibly soon after the war) blacks in Georgia living in perfect harmony with their masters. Although, we probably shouldn't expect a detailed exploration of race relations in 19th century America from a children's movie.

Lord have mercy on the indifferent because no-one else will.

[MarkBastable]

Lord have mercy on the indifferent because no-one else will.

Don't worry. I will.

[G L Wilson]

Don't worry. I will.

Bastable, I am sorry to disappoint you but I am God.

[MarkBastable]

Bastable, I am sorry to disappoint you but I am God.

Are you the Old Testament God? That would explain the motive behind this thread.

Now we need another called Is GLWilson antidisnetic?

Incidentally, that only leaves the L. What does that stand for?

[The Atheist]

I think it's time to add that old Bill Shakespeare himself was anti-semitic.

I guess that makes him worse than Hitler because he was before Adolf.

[Emil Miller]

I think it's time to add that old Bill Shakespeare himself was anti-semitic.

I guess that makes him worse than Hitler because he was before Adolf.

And, according to previous threads on this forum, were Dickens, Hemingway, Scott Fitzgerald and various others, but who cares? Unless, that is, one is trying to display one's moral superiority to those who think otherwise.

[Drkshadow03]

Of course, The Merchant of Venice is anti-Semitic. And Dickens essentially admitted that his depiction of Fagin was as well, but I agree none of that puts any of them anywhere near the same despicable level as Hitler, and GL Wilson is being ridiculous to make such a comparison between Disney and the dictator.

[G L Wilson]

Are you the Old Testament God? That would explain the motive behind this thread.

Now we need another called Is GLWilson antidisnetic?

Incidentally, that only leaves the L. What does that stand for?

Lord; as in this statement, "O my God, my Lord, Wilson?!"

"The Lord is a man of war." Exodus
No-one ever thinks much of me as a thinker, therefore I say why not strike with decision the forces of evil?