I don't believe the history is relevant. NASCAR formed from bootleggers racing their cars and being chased by the cops. BLM is the result of systemic racism in the police force and blacks are treated differently whether the committed a crime or not. They're hardly the same thing. Things have changed since those days and many NASCAR fans are military and police or family of military and police. Their fully aware of the history.
Everything doesn't have a middle. Sometimes one side is 100% wrong. Or else flat-Earthers wouldn't be universally laughed at.
No. It means that, if you understood the history, you would understand the views of BLM. You do know it's possible to support BLM and not be anti-cop, right?
Didn't running shine have something to do with it? After prohibition they needed something to do with the souped up cars.
To be nit picky, there are a couple road courses. Also, even on traditional tracks there is pretty big variation in track length (Martinsville is half a mile, Talladega is over 2.5) and even shape. For instance Talladega is a tri-oval.
It's all on Google. But, if you really need help, here's a link from someone most people here will understand. https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=440265920009736
Of course it is. But it's obvious that knowing the history is important to you. You might have shared your knowledge.
That may or may not be true, but a non-fan might be curious. The only thing I knew about NASCAR before today was from a scene in The West Wing. To @steve2^4's point about moonshine running, though, I can contribute that the Kennedy family fortune is based on Joe Kennedy Sr. running whiskey down from Canada during Prohibition. And apparently my great-grandmother made bathtub gin in Brooklyn at about the same time. Interesting stuff.
I would be more than happy to discuss history ... of Southerners, NASCAR, bootlegging ... whatever. But, by prefacing your question with "it would have been nice ...", whether intentional or not, you are stopping conversation and starting an argument.
Yes and no. Almost as soon as companies began selling cars, racing teams sprang up as a way to promote the vehicles and entertainment. By the very early 1900s not only were there hundreds of racetracks (which often did double duty for horse racing), but there began to be two camps of racing. One was overseen by AAA and would later morph into IndyCar, the other were called "outlaw racers." These were tracks that didn't follow the rules put out by the AAA (mainly because they couldn't afford the costs associated with them, or could find enough cars and drivers who could afford the kind of equipment AAA was requiring). The majority of the races at the time were "outlaw" and would sometimes be held in the same venues that AAA-sanctioned races were. If you want an idea of how early this system sprung up, remember that the first automobile was built in the US in 1896 and by 1910 "outlaw" races were already a thing. AAA races paid the most money, and if you were a AAA licensed racer, you couldn't compete in any "outlaw" races without losing your license. If you were an outlaw racer, you could make your way to the AAA sanctioned races if you were good enough and made enough money. And were white. While the AAA had no official rules stipulating that drivers had to be white, no driver of color was ever able to race in a sanctioned event until well after WWII. (The first black Indy 500 driver was Willy T. Ribbs in 1985.) Barney Oldfield was a leading racer in the early 1900s. IIRC, he had racked up more wins than anyone else at that point. In 1910, he was challenged to a race by the first black heavyweight boxer, Jack Johnson, and due to the rules barring black drivers, it had to take place at an outlaw track and Oldfield had his license suspended for two years for daring to race against a black man. (Oldfield won the race handily, BTW.) One of the first black racecar drivers in the US went by the name Rajo Jack, and despite his records, he was never allowed to race on the Indy circuit due to the color of his skin. Don't think that the outlaw tracks were somehow more enlightened than AAA sanctioned ones. Rajo Jack would have to pass himself off as Portuguese to be able to enter the race (it helped that most folks were unfamiliar with Portugal at the time), and there were occasions where the only reason he was able to race was that the promoters couldn't find enough cars and drivers otherwise. There were undoubtedly bootleggers who'd run shine and race on the outlaw tracks, and the outlaw tracks were largely absorbed by NASCAR or Indy over the years, but it's a misnomer to think that the bootleggers simply became NASCAR racers after Prohibition ended. The mechanics and drivers on the AAA circuit paid attention (if they didn't actually participate, AFAIK, there were no rules saying that you couldn't be a mechanic on a AAA sanctioned team and a mechanic on an outlaw team) to what was happening on the outlaw circuits because those guys almost always built their cars from scratch with whatever they could scrounge together, and would some times figure out improvements that might not have otherwise occurred to the guys in AAA. Some film footage of the Oldfield and Johnson race still exists and you can watch it here. (The date's wrong, BTW, the race was in 1910, not 1911.)
No. BLM is under the umbrella of ALM. Back The Badge is an entirely different thing. For the most part cops are fantastic, with few exceptions % wise. For the most part, don't want to get shot? Obey the law.
What? BLM is a relatively new organization and a grass roots movement. It is not under any other umbrella.
It takes three laps, 7.98 miles, for the cars to get up to speed at Talladega. When 40 cars come by you in less than two seconds on that third lap, three, sometimes four wide... Wow. From the bottom row of the tri-oval grandstands, you’re 25 meters from the closest row of cars. Just the wall of wind they are pushing ahead of them is incredible.