Elitist architects reacted to the fire which tore through Notre Dame by arguing that the rebuilding should not reflect “white European France.”
In a Rolling Stone article entitled How Should France Rebuild Notre Dame?, the cathedral is denigrated as “a deep-seated symbol of resentment, a monument to a deeply flawed institution and an idealized Christian European France that arguably never existed in the first place.”
“The building was so overburdened with meaning that its burning feels like an act of liberation,” said Patricio del Real, an architecture historian at Harvard University.
To describe a horrendous fire that almost completely destroyed the historic cathedral had firefighters not rescued it just in time as “an act of liberation” is completely callous.
The writer of the Rolling Stone piece agues that the rebuilding of Notre Dame should not reflect “a non-secular, white European France,” but should instead be “a reflection of the France of today, a France that is currently in the making.”
This view is echoed by Cesare Birignani, assistant professor at the Spitzer School of Architecture, City College of New York, who says that the previous restoration of the cathedral, which sought to keep it as true to its origins as possible, represented “an idealized version of French history that arguably never existed in the first place.”
What are they going to do, put a crescent moon on top of it? How about surrounding it with minarets? Will that be politically correct enough?
“The idea that you can recreate the building is naive,” says John Harwood, an architectural historian and associate professor at the University of Toronto. “It is to repeat past errors, category errors of thought, and one has to imagine that if anything is done to the building it has to be an expression of what we want — the Catholics of France, the French people — want. What is an expression of who we are now? What does it represent, who is it for?”
Modernist architects with these kind of warped ideas shouldn’t be allowed within a mile of Notre Dame.
A Massachusetts school superintendent says that white people will have to ‘rewire their brains’ in order to stop being racist.
Pittsfield Public Schools chief Jason McCandless (who is white as the driven snow) made the comment in the context of his district introducing black history courses this fall.
Asserting that white people had benefited from a corrupt system that “oppresses black individuals,” McCandless said the only way to make amends was to “rewire our brains.”
He suggested that President Trump’s rhetoric made the courses more vital than ever, accusing Trump of “(preaching) hate on a daily basis … which is utterly unacceptable.”
Pittsfield is over 63 percent white and 11 percent African-American. Less than 10 percent of the city’s population are registered Republicans.
McCandless expressed his hope that African-American history courses would eventually become a graduation requirement.
Because there’s no better way to organically change people’s perceptions than forcing them to learn a particular dogma.
That doesn’t sound like social engineering at all.
Former FBI Official: ‘Trump Supporters Are Like Terrorists’
Published
3 days ago
on
16 August, 2019
Steve Watson
“If you call Trump followers racist en masse, they simply coalesce around each other”
Former FBI official turned MSNBC analyst Frank Figliuzzi, who sees Hitler in everything Trump does, stated on a live broadcast this week that Trump supporters are a lot like terrorists rallying around a figurehead.
The former Assistant Director for Counterintelligence at the FBI, was discussing racism (shocker) with MSNBC host Chris Jansing, when the pair suggested that it would be a good idea for Democrats to keep accusing Trump supporters of being racist.
Jansing spewed:
“I think one of the things, Frank Figliuzzi, is that this president has always, from anyone who was around him, Anthony Scaramucci knows this as well as anybody else, demanded this blind loyalty, right? ‘I say it, it must be so. Or even if you don’t think it’s so, you don’t criticize me for it.’”
And Figliuzzi responded:
“Well, this is why it’s so important to look through the lens of radicalization when you look at this president and then apply counterradicalization techniques. Because you’re right, attacking his followers is going to be counterproductive. He demands that loyalty, and they are loyal. So if you call Trump followers racist en masse, they simply coalesce around each other and become even more defensive and protective of the leader, just as they would in, say, a terrorist organization …”
That was enough to get the attention of Fox News analyst Dan Bongino, who said “I can’t believe this guy is still allowed on the air.”
“MSNBC is willing to put complete lunatics on the air who will say absolutely anything at any time, as long as it makes Trump look bad,” he added.
A Volkswagen commercial has been banned in the UK for violating “gender stereotypes” because it showed a woman caring for a baby.
Yes, really.
The ad shows a scene of a woman and a man in a tent on a cliff face, two male astronauts floating in a spaceship and a male para-athlete with a prosthetic leg doing the long jump.
At the end of the clip, a woman is seen sat on a bench next to a pram.
The commercial was banned by the UK Advertising Standard Authority (ASA) after just three people complained, with the ASA asserting that it violated gender stereotyping rules.
“By juxtaposing images of men in extraordinary environments and carrying out adventurous activities with women who appeared passive or engaged in a stereotypical care-giving role, we considered that the ad directly contrasted stereotypical male and female roles and characteristics in a manner that gave the impression that they were exclusively associated with one gender,” said the ASA. “We concluded that the ad presented gender stereotypes in way that was likely to cause harm and therefore breached the Code.”
Volkswagen tried to explain the meaning behind the ad, but it was to no avail.
“The core message of the ad was centred on the ability of the human spirit to adapt to challenges and change brought about by circumstances. They illustrated that through a number of different scenarios featuring various characters so that as diverse an audience as possible would be able to identify with the message.”
“They included the final scene of the woman in the park as a relatable example of adaptation to change, as they believed that welcoming a newborn into the family was a life changing experience that would be shared by many viewers, regardless of gender. The scene served a secondary purpose of illustrating the reduction of engine noise in an electric vehicle.”
Meanwhile, ads that reinforce negative gender stereotypes about men are still perfectly fine.
Ads showing an attractive woman in a bikini are banned on the London Underground, but ads promoting the homophobic country of Brunei which stones gay people to death are also fine.
The ASA also banned an ad featuring a sexy female mechanic after a single complaint because it could cause “offense” and was sexually suggestive.
So ads showing woman engaged in typically feminine roles are forbidden and ads showing women engaged in typically masculine roles are forbidden.
Bizarre3 days ago
clownworld5 days ago
Politics3 days ago
crime6 days ago
Politics2 days ago
crime6 days ago
Islam4 days ago
World News5 days ago