This kinds of reminds me of what we discussed in AMST 255 where people seen as inferior used the fact that they were not black as a crutch to be seen closer to the superior race. I know that Irish Americans are white in skin color but they were treated as lesser then because they were Irish.

This evokes thoughts reminiscent of our previous classes, where significant historical symbols and figures undergo commercialization for financial gain. Despite its intended status as a pivotal "cornerstone of the nation," there appears to be a tendency to regard it merely as an ordinary rock devoid of historical value. Moreover, there exists a symbolic dimension to this situation, as the ongoing process of chipping away at the nation's independence parallels the gradual diminution of the symbolically charged independence originally associated with the rock.

It's quite fascinating how something seemingly trivial can hold such a rich history. In fact, it's gone to the extent that someone has the official role of being the keeper of records for this rock.

It is somewhat ironic that the selection of a rock divided into two parts was made to symbolize their forthcoming independence from Britain. This choice gains added significance considering that, in time, they became the very entity against which both slaves and Native Americans would struggle for freedom.

I think that this particular statement speaks volumes on the way in which our history is taught. It often comes from the perspective of the people in power or the white men who so happened to be associated with it. Very often forgetting the other point of views which hold just as much weight or if not more in the telling of the stories and history.

In my opinion, it is difficult for a white man to fully comprehend how serious slavery is, even given how it impact society and the past.

I personally, have never heard of people celebrating Watch Night.