Yes, I have played with him. Mea culpa!
The Facebook conversation:
####################################################
KEVIN SHORT
Mark Tindall can I suggest you go to the Maitland, our place our stories website and read the full story as penned by Chas Keys and myself. For reasons known only to themselves, individuals are trying to politising Maitlands unique attachment to Jocko. Our story tells how he came here in the first instance and of his journey through time. Whilst acknowledging the origins of lawn jockeys generally, the American connotations to slavery and the probably fictitious legend of George Washington crossing the Delaware and Jocko freezing to death, our Jocko is about a street scape statue that's been held in affection by Maitlanders over many, many generations, his origins irrelevant. Stop trying to make political mileage out of something that is apolitical. Whilst the broader story of emancipated slaves has its relevance elsewhere, this is about OUR Back Boy and we love him, just as citizens of yesterday have and those of tomorrow will. The only sad part about this is the consultant's fee. You could have asked Chas and myself .... our story would have been free.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
MY REPLY
Kevin Short > can I suggest [sic] (that) you go to the Maitland, (o)(O)ur (sic) (p)(P)lace (sic) (,) [sic] (o)(O)ur [sic] (s)(S)tories [sic] website and read the full story as penned by Chas Keys and myself(.) (sic) (?)
I have already read the ahistorical nonsense on your blog. I studied both history and political philosophy at Macquarie University. Which university did you and Chas Keys study history at? You have made mistakes about historical evidence that no university educated historian would ever make. As a current published philosopher, and former School Principal and Training Manager, I am willing to discuss your multiple errors in a formal public debate. My usual public speaking fee will apply. (Currently a bargain price of $2,000.) I will use the tools of philosophy (my major - logic, ethics, aesthetics, philosophy of history, etc). For example I will explain your obvious appeal to tradition fallacy (argumentum ad antiquitatem).
I have also fixed the grammatical errors in your post. (University educated historians don't make so many grammatical errors.)
> For reasons known only to themselves, individuals are trying to politising (politicise) [sic] Maitland(')s [sic] unique attachment to Jocko.
I totally agree. Why do you think the Penfold bloc is trying to poiticise the racist garden gnome? I can answer definitively with reference to history, political philosophy, sociology, education and psychology.
> our Jocko is about a street( )scape [sic] statue that's been held in affection by Maitlanders over many, many generations, (h)(H)is origin(s) [sic] (is) irrelevant.
Yes, I know the Penfold bloc propaganda about men in Maitland patting the racist garden gnome on the head as they went off to WW1. White slave owners patted similar lawn jockeys on the head as their hitched their horses outside their mansions (paid by slavery).
> Stop trying to make political mileage out of something that is apolitical.
As an educator and political philosopher, I am not making any political statement. Your statement is full of assumptions about political philosophy. I am interested in accurate history as verified by historians educated at universities - not amateur opinions by ultracrepidarians.
> this is about OUR Back Boy and we love him, just as citizens of yesterday have and those of tomorrow will.
Yes, I acknowledge that many uneducated people love the racist garden gnome. The Penfold bloc propaganda (steeped in right-wing political philosophy) states that.
> The only sad part about this is the consultant's fee. You could have asked Chas and myself .... our story would have been free.
Again, at which university did you and Chas Keys study history?
As a current published philosopher, and former School Principal and Training Manager, who has studied both history and political philosophy, my professional opinion is that the racist garden gnome should be placed in a museum with a plaque describing its verified racist history. If it must be shown in public then the plaque needs to be far bigger as the wider Maitland community need to know its accurate racist history.
It's a pity that most people in Maitland and District Historical Society don't have a university education in history. I note that former President, Keith Cockburn, only had a primary school education. He's also the person who, on Maitland's Cultural Advisory Committee (of which I was also a member), wrote a document which excluded Aboriginals from Maitland's Cultural Plan. He stated that "Aboriginals have no culture. We bought them culture in 1788." He took me to court (with a barrister) for calling him a racist. The Magistrate dismissed the case and said that I was allowed to call Keith Cockburn a racist. I'm sure Keith also loves the racist garden gnome.
In a similar manner, Peter F Smith, who you stated (at his Maitland and District Historical Society's sponsored speech on Molly Morgan) was a wonderful historian, has no university study in history. (His LinkedIn profile states: Indiana University Indianapolis, Master of Arts - MA, Literature and Composition; University of Sydney, Bachelor of Arts - BA, English, Psychology, Political Science)
As you are suggesting what I should do, I suggest that you get a university education in history. Amateurs can make huge mistakes.
##################################################
Do you know how the nonsense about the racist garden gnome (Jocko Graves, the Little Black Boy) was spread? It was from this children's book. I have a copy.
Do you know how the nonsense about the racist garden gnome (Jocko Graves, the Little Black Boy) was spread? It was from this children's book. I have a copy.
