Is this about race?

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

Is the following a racial statement?

But with the war came a new colored man in the service. He, I might say, offered excellent opportunity for study. For the most part, though much better educated, he was flatly demanding - he had no interest whatever in things that the service, prior to that time, had held 'hallowed', regulations and such. Consequently, he fared badly. Some who were not actually capable of holding a new rating would demand a chance at them, in accordance with the Naval service's new policy, would be given a chance. I am sorry to say that due to practically nothing but inattention and indolence a great portion of them flopped miserably. There were some, however, who grasped the opportunity and have progressed wonderfully well. Of those men, I am proud because they have helped me perfect my theory. Those who failed seldom hesitated in wailing that they were victims of discrimination. That attitude did much to heighten tension and to make it harder for willing men to attain new levels.

I'll post who wrote it, who the receiver was, and where it was found later.

[ETC Brian Strattard]

Joe,

Hmmmm...I would guess that the passage was not racist in intent, but more toward verbage of the time period...would it be referring to "wind-talkers"??? I'm just taking an uneducated guess...am I anywhere close???

Strat sends...

[ETC Pat Kaschube]

I'd say not. The intent seems to based not around race (though the race in question is new to whatever they were doing) but their individual motivation. Without the whole story though it's hard to say. By today's standards it would be considered racial. Strat addressed that already.

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

I don't see it as racist.......but I don't yet understand your point of posting it.
I would have to see the whole thing in the context it was written.

[GMCM Bill Wells (Ret)]

I don't see it as racist.......but I don't yet understand your point of posting it.
I would have to see the whole thing in the context it was written.

This is an interesting remark. You have had the "context" of other statements but you continue to remark that they are "racist." How are we to believe you would not see it as "racist" if you had the entire piece.

Would you really understand the purpose of the piece or simply tag it "racist" regardless of the context?

What makes you the final arbeiter of what is "racist" or not?

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

Hmmmmmmmmm, I'll always be the final arbeiter of my own opinion.Joe asked people for their opinion......I gave him mine.

Wray, look, it's the same program on every channel.

[GMCM Bill Wells (Ret)]

Joe, you may as well tell 'em. We'll see what the opinions are then.

[MKCM Brett Ayer]

I would have to see the whole thing in the context it was written.

Stu,

You are correct, as posted this is an anachronism, and cannot be effectively analyzed.

You might as well ask if a triple expansion steam engine is an efficient means of marine propulsion.

Be Safe,

Brett

[GMCM Bill Wells (Ret)]

Stu,

You are correct, as posted this is an anachronism, and cannot be effectively analyzed.

You might as well ask if a triple expansion steam engine is an efficient means of marine propulsion.

Be Safe,



It was in its day considering the alternatives. The cutter Gresham in 1903 was able to make a steady 12 knots. Not far off what a cutter will do today on economy speed. Of course, in those days they had a real black gang.

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

Brett, thanks again,.....as always.....the voice of reason. How wrong could I possibly be if you agree with me?

[BMC John Phillips III]

An excerpt from this site - http://www.aug.edu/~libwrw/Articles/Haley.html

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

Of course, in those days they had a real black gang.......

Bill, I don't know what this means....care to explain?

[GMCM Bill Wells (Ret)]

Of course, in those days they had a real black gang.......

Bill, I don't know what this means....care to explain?

A Master Chief Boatswain's Mate who doesn't know this expression. Tsk, Tsk.

Is there not come wording about honoring traditions or some such?

Perhaps you could email the current Silver Ancient Mariner. It is his charge to uphold the traditions of the service.

I believe this is one of those times when I'll let you find it on your own. The education will be more rewarding.

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

Although parts of my quote were certainly cited in the treatise that MCPO Wells has on the link provided by John, I took it from reference 1 provided by MCPO Wells.

Yes the author was then PO1 Alex Haley in November 1943.

It is my favorite quote concerning human relations as you can substitute any race or any gender where Alex had used "colored people" and you'll know someone in your career who has fit the description.

I don't know why the NAACP filed it under U.S. Coast Guard Discrimination because it certainly isn't written as a discrimination complaint. I got a transcription of the letter from MCPO Wells many years ago, via the internet [so it wasn't ancient history] .

I'm sure some who read the letter will call Alex an "Uncle Tom" [or whatever the latest phrase that replaced uncle tom] because he didn't side with those who wanted to disregard the things the naval service held hallow, to paraphrase some of the letter.

I put this here and asked the question mainly to see the contemporary thoughts of those active duty members towards the reading. When it was written, those sixty four years ago, it was written in a language of the times, by an educated first class petty officer.

Sometimes we are influenced by what others say. If you were at a larger command and saw three people ordered in and you were one short, you would be on the phone talking to whoever you knew in the area to get their opine on the best one. You would be arm twisting to influence whoever's decision it is to distribute the incoming people. Influence can work to someones advantage or disadvantage. That is a bias towards an individual, a prejudice. That is why lawyers argue over witness' access to television during a trial ... to limit the influence against their client.

[GMCM Bill Wells (Ret)]

Joe,

The NAACP then, and perhaps now, maintained files on all the services and not just because it was WWII. Some of the records are pre-WWII.

The NAACP, then, and is still, no the watch for any signs of discrimination or preceived discrimination, in the armed forces. Since the letter came from Haley it wound up loosely filed and there it sat until I uncovered it while doing some research of microfilm at the University of South Carolina.

There were papers on many cases. Some were proved to be discrimination but others vindicated the Coast Guard. In fact nearly all of them put on blame on the Coast Guard. They are interesting reading.

I do not believe the article will do anything to help Stuart with his context problems, but perhaps he did learn something if he read it at all.

[BMC John Phillips III]

Since the letter came from Haley it wound up loosely filed and there it sat until I uncovered it while doing some research of microfilm at the University of South Carolina.

I love this about you Bill, it's almost like you wrote it yourself. How can you not see what everyone else sees so easily?

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

John,

Do you accuse the discoverers of artifacts as the originators of those artifacts or is your anger towards one person?

Inquiring minds want to know.

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

Tsk tsk tsk....... I ask a simple question and can't get a straight forward answer without the insults.
Here's my context issue Bill, ...I can't accept things I view as racist slurs in any context.

Had you taken the time to take my question serious, you'd have seen that I quoted the part I didn't understand. Put the question back into context. What did you mean by Of course, in those days they had a real black gang.......

You know what Bill.....never mind, I no longer want to know.

[GMCM Bill Wells (Ret)]

Stuart,

I recommended you look it up. I have no idea why you are so sensitive to anything that sounds remotely racial to you. I do not know what your prejudice is.

If you do not want to learn something you should have already known then there is little I can do. Even if I did explain it, you would have corrupted it and altered it in your lexicon of racism.

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

http://www.jacksjoint.com/where_there_is_no_glory.htm talks of the black gang from a 1943 publication of the U.S. Coast Guard Magazine.

http://www.uscg.mil/history/WEBORALHISTORY/CAPT_David_Sinclair_28.html is part of Capt Sinclair's memoirs, talks of the black gang

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

Joe, you are a vast storehouse of knowledge on all worldly things...... Thanks

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

I don't think so Stuart. I do google well. [boy can that mean quite a few things ... but it's refering to using google.com's search capabilities :)]

[BMC John Phillips III]

is part of Capt Sinclair's memoirs, talks of the black gang

Joe, I learned what the "black gang" was thanks to a crusty old Master Chief that I used to work for. Bill didn't use it in his post to teach anyone a lesson, he used it cause he knew it could be misinterpretted for something different than what it meant in the past and he was laying bait- again. I don't think anyone would deny he's a smart man, but smart as he is, he is devious and deceptive, neither good qualities if you ask me.

The "Unvarnished Truth" ?

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

John,

Just because you knew what it meant doesn't mean others did.

It's all about the context. There were plenty of sites talking about the black gang, and the AFL's [union] main competitor, the CIO produced a newsletter in the 30s called Black Gang News.

I knew who were members of the black gang. Some didn't. Those reading the Cutter Gresham had a real black gang and mistaken that for some racial slur are lacking some historical context. Did any of your crew read that and approach you with an inquiry? I'm sure some read the story at Jack's Joint and the Capt's memories.

There are things spoken in the younger generations ... younger than you and certainly younger than I, having context that is foreign to me. The same can be said going up and down generational lines. I'm sure if AckAck were here, he could use something from the 30s that I would take out of context. It just works that way as the generations celebrate the shifting of their age group from one decade to the next.

I asked once last year, while I was in Manistee ... Do you have a beaners in town?. The response was ... "yeah, we have mexicans". I thought for a minute or so and replied ... no, not mexicans, the coffee shop, beaners. It's been quite a while since I've heard beaners used to describe hispanics. Visit http://www.beaners.com in case some have a difficulty with my statements.

Since reading authors with ages crossing generational lines, I find myself doing a little more research and certainly some reflection on things that can have multiple meanings. I try not to let any preconceived notions to influence me with predjudicial biases towards what is written. Sometimes that means visiting http://www.m-w.com to find the definitions of words, sometimes it means to visit http://www.google.com to read more.

I'm sure there are people out there that think the Constitution's rule of counting slaves as 3/5ths of a person is about race. They would be wrong but that could be another discussion.

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

And John, your version isn't the unvarnished truth,.....it's still speculation. You can't possibly pretend to know why he was actually posting in that manner. You're speculating. I agree with you, he could have choosen better words, and I agree he's smart enough to know what he's doing. But you're stating things as fact, when you can't possibly know.
The written word is much different from everyday speech. It's like "no pun intended"........ in speech, the no pun intended is inserted to cover for what just came out of your mouth. You can't erase what you said. But to actually type.....no pun intended......... the pun is left in for some affect. If it is really unintended, change your words before publication.

You also missed my point. It wasn't about the term that was used. I'm not a fan of the term, and don't see myself using it to refer to anyone. My problem was in referrence to the context it was being used in. I asked for clarification......I'm left with what I was speculating.........again, in walks Joe with answer I was asking for.

We don't have historical content to apply at work........If someone were talking this way in one of my workspaces, I'd put an end to it. They could tell me what they meant, I'd let them know what I intrepretted it to mean, and we'd move on, lessons learned on both sides.

[GMCM Bill Wells (Ret)]

We don't have historical content to apply at work........If someone were talking this way in one of my workspaces, I'd put an end to it. They could tell me what they meant, I'd let them know what I intrepretted it to mean, and we'd move on, lessons learned on both sides.

But it is a standard shipboard term and has been since the era of steam. A master chief should be familiar with common traditional terms used in the Service. To automatically assign a meaning to something one does not know and places censure upon it is not good leadership.

You once wrote that in your early years in the Coast Guard there was "pride in ownership." You went on to criticize people who did not take "ownership" for the unit tasks. Is this not the same? You wanted someone else to answer your question for you? Is this the "ownership" principle?

You have also written that you were not " reasonable person." Are you being reasonable when you attack someone for hanging out a term that was meant to promote some individual ownership. You, at one time agreed with this principle (and not in the distant past). You wrote, "We take great pride in those things that we have laid ownership and ignore everything else, thinking that its (sic) is someone else's problem, someone else will clean up the mess."

Was I expected to clean it up? Evidently not because you commented "Our time in this service is short and we have a resonsibility to both those who came before us and those [whom] will follow after us to do what needs to be done, and do it right."

One of the things done by those preceding you was to engrain people with those cultural matters unique to the Service.

You also wondered, and may still, why fewer E-7s take part in the CCTI. Perhaps this is because they see their senior "peers" who cannot explain to them the purpose or any good reason to go through the agrivation and expense. It could be they are following the example of their senior "peers."

In closing, I leave you with one more of your quotes, "We need to reclaim everything that is rightfully ours, in short, everything."

It appears that traditional and cultural factors of the Coast Guard are not those things to be reclaimed. Perhaps cleaning that image is more important than cleaning out the corners on the mess deck.

[YNCM Doug Squires (Ret)]

Bill:

If all of the Chief's in the Mess were BIG country Music fans, and you kept coming into the Chief''s mess playing hard rock music, someone would stand up and tell you to turn that crap off - nobody likes it. Might even be a bit saltier than that when telling you !

Bill shut that crap off. Nobody likes it.

[MSTC Michael Schmidtke]

Michael, try not talking down if you want to be taken seriously. Discuss the topic like a professional.

Sorry, I'm saying sorry before I even start, because this is not on topic....but I just have to get this off my chest!!!

Thank GOD admin deleted that (other)thread! Bill, I just wish as does many here that you took you're own advice! (about the BOLD, Italic and the underlined) I'll go no further, as I will show that I'm a better man. And you will and still continue to talk down to others!

I'll add, that you're "advising ADMIN" to watch my words....I speak to you in writing that I would in person. This is funny...like you are telling on me....:D You would not be allowed to talk down to me or anyone else if this was a face to face!!!

I put all capitalized letters in place in a written response to show the emotion that you can't get across in a discussion board format! Put emotion (TONE of voice) in place of all caps! You said it couldn't be done....I'm doing it.

Now that that is off my chest, I'll no longer hijack a thread responding to one of your posts! I'm done with you, for now! Now I'll try to take some needed advice and not respond to you...I'm also giving this advice to my teenage daughter(learning to deal with difficult people), so we'll see how things go?:p

[MSTC Michael Schmidtke]

Bill shut that crap off. Nobody likes it.

MC, I'm sorry that I took your thunder away from you, but I loved that post!!!! And who said we couldn't learn from the "RETIRED"????:confused:

[GMCM Bill Wells (Ret)]

Bill:

If all of the Chief's in the Mess were BIG country Music fans, and you kept coming into the Chief''s mess playing hard rock music, someone would stand up and tell you to turn that crap off - nobody likes it. Might even be a bit saltier than that when telling you !

Bill shut that crap off. Nobody likes it.

Therefore you would shut down something a member of the mess likes just because you don't? Where is the core value of "Respect?" As stated, the respect value was not created as an instrument of general respect but respect for diversity. Is not someone liking "hard rock" music just part of the diverse nature of the Coast Guard. What if the "hard rock" person does not like "Big country" music. May he not ask that it be cut off as well. He could believe that those liking country music are red necks and by association racists. The same for those who wish to listen to Rap or other Hip-Hop. Would it not do well to give it a try? You may be able to use it with the younger folk on the unit. Word!

I did not realize that being a music critic was a CPO practical factor. Of course those like Wagner will be called NAZIs. And so it goes.

Stuart has taken it upon himself to call me a "racist" based solely on his misinterpertation of my posts (now in the trash). He calls it an opinion, but considering the number of times he used it, I would say it is more of a calling than an opinion. I have asked that he meet me in open discussion about it (the way chiefs are supposed to do) or as you suggest, "turn that crap off." However, it does appear that many like Stuart's catterwalling for none have asked him to cease his attacks. Will you? Probably not.

One thing, Stuart wants to be called "Master." It shows he wants to be supreme, here is the quote of his in case any missed it. He wrote, "I do kinda wish more people called me Master though. Not Master Chief......just Master."
Sturat may claim this was a joke, but in my opinion it has a racial connotation. To top it off, he made the remark while still and E-8 less than a year ago.


Doug, the definition of crap is as elusive as the core values and it certainly has a different connection to different people. I know that many will look at the finest works in the world and call them crap. I am sure this is the case here.

It could be many follow, Curtis Sliwa, founder of the Guardian Angels, "who admitted that he did not know much about art, but believed he was qualified to serve on that commission because as he said, he “knows the difference between a Michelob and an Michelangelo."

Perhaps there are those who don't know the difference between metaphor and Michelob.

Michael, I see that the core values are being violated again. The message I replied to the Administrator was a rebuttal the accusations you and others have made. I suggested if they are going to censure me, they should look at others as well.

You continue to produce condencending comments and not very logical ones at that. For example, "I speak to you in writing that I would in person. This is funny...like you are telling on me." Speaking and writing are two different functions. I am sure you have been one of the ones running to the administrators every chance you get. I suppose this is because you have never been a full time member of an at sea CPO mess. You are a tattletale. It shows in your writing or is that speaking?

Of course this is an opinion because you wrote it. Speaking of illogical comments. You wrote, "I put all capitalized letters in place in a written response to show the emotion that you can't get across in a discussion board format! Put emotion (TONE of voice) in place of all caps! You said it couldn't be done....I'm doing it."

I try not to put emotion in my comments because that diminishes the discussion. However, I will use the national vocabulary to express my sentiments on a topic. I fail to see (because you provided no examples) of how "capitalized letters" will provide emotion. What "all caps" provides on the Internet is shouting. If you are using all caps then the only emotion you are displaying is your personal frustration that you feel compelled to shout out. Of course this is just what you have written. I, unlike others, admit I could be incorrect on this opinion. You may wish to try rewriting, or re-speaking, your theories.

Some advise from someone who has been involved in Interent discussion groups since the late 1980s; attack the message, not the messenger. Destroy the other person's premise with logic and fact. If someone refuses to explain their accusations about you call that person out to explain himself. You will find most are cowards and never accept the challenge or they will make unwarranted complaints about you to the administrative group as well as other board members.

They will also build alliances of equally unsure people which makes the discussions more fun becaue they will all speak as a single voice instead of people with free will. This means the group becomes one, therefore, only one answer need to be given. They are also reactionary. They, for the most part, cannot think on their own and have to wait upon you to write something so they may react.

Also most do not read much, so they have limited backgrounds with which to react, in single mindedness, to what ever you may write.

I offer this advise so that you may be a better poster in the future. I am sure you could have something of value to offer besides places to go to lunch. However, you must use your own mind. Following others in this atmosphere does nothing for the individual but cement ideas that are largely wrong because they are poorly formulated in the first place.

Many years ago I wrote that the Coast Guard is largely anti-intellectual. The hue and cry that was set up over this one only proved my point.

I believe in making younger chiefs better thinkers. Joe began this thread to cause people to think. However, it turned into a bashing thread by CPOs of all stripes. Why is that? Why did you not comment about the article instead of bashing?





This thread has been moved to the round file by Admin...you all know why.