Living Persons Now Allowed On US Stamps

Thank you for understanding, additional money usually equated to less life struggles and increased safety for those with the money. Thus, the community group holding slaves is better off, consistent with one of the purposes of morals.

I think you are using a very narrow interpretation of "increased safety". And pretending that having more money by being a slave owner is more important than having less money by being a better human being. No doubt you like seeing all the Confederate traitors on 20th century stamps.

My viewpoint is simple: No living person on a US stamp! I'd also like this to be extended to coins (official currency or commemorative). That's about it.

Related thread, ICYMI:
https://goscf.com/t/20631&whichpage=8

All this hilarious back and forth here is Exhibit A as to why the current rule should remain in place. And is presumably why it came about in the first place, too.

Very simple. No living people on US stamps.

There is no good reason to deviate from this policy, period. As Rog said: "It can give unfair advantage to those who may use the opportunity to further their politics or agenda."

I agree that we should ban living people from postage stamps. But if that's the principle, then let's apply it consistently: corporate logos, copyrighted commercial characters, and anything that functions primarily as an advertisement should be off the table too.

Disney characters? Sorry, Mickey—the mail isn't a billboard.

Dungeons & Dragons? Unless the dragon is personally delivering the letter, I'm not sure why it belongs on a postage stamp either.

The argument for banning living people is that a postage stamp shouldn't be used as a vehicle for promotion. Fair enough. But if that's the standard, why do corporations get a free pass?

It gets especially absurd when we pay a company for the privilege of advertising its products on something we then pay the Postal Service to use. Think about that business model: "Please allow us to advertise to you—and then charge us for the privilege of displaying our advertisement."

And where exactly does that road lead?

Are we going to see a Mystic Stamp Company postage stamp next? Perhaps a handsome commemorative featuring a giant magnifying glass pointed at another postage stamp, accompanied by the reassuring message:

"Collectors and experts agree—Mystic's U.S. Stamp Catalog is the best comprehensive list ever created by a dealer!"

At that point, we might as well stop pretending these are commemorative stamps and simply call them what they've become: miniature billboards.

A postage stamp should commemorate history, culture, achievement, or something of genuine public interest. It shouldn't turn an envelope into a tiny NASCAR, plastered with corporate sponsorships.

Alas, this idea is very old. The Private Die Proprietary stamps of the 1862-1883 and 1898-1901 era are perfect examples of the government allowing advertising on stamps as long as they included the information that the government felt was needed (the proper value for the tax rates, and the words U.S. Internal Revenue). So suddenly complaining now seems a bit late.

The Private Die Proprietary stamps aren't really comparable, though. They were revenue stamps placed on the products themselves to indicate that the required tax had been paid. They weren't postage stamps used to carry mail.

They were still government approved advertising. And at the time, probably at least as well known. And one could argue that the secret marks of the banknotes were advertising for that bank note company, since that is why they were placed on the stamps. Obviously that's a bit of a stretch, but it was a form of advertising. As were plate imprints.

Ive never seen anyone be so triggered by Mickey Mouse or Elvis or Coca-Cola or a Ford Mustang that they lose their crap in public and start railing on about "fascists and Nazis!". It is hardly fair to compare a living political figure to what you are talking about. If dragons send you into a tailspin, you truly need professional help. Come on man. We live in the outrage era, and it is just so tiresome. Corporations and people are being brought to their knees by petty Tik-Tok accounts. Grow a set.

The bottom line is that depicting living persons on stamps potentially leads to a sitting political figure being depicted which by law I believe could be considered an in-kind contribution by the very government that is supposed to leave some things out of the partisan playbox.

Why invite problems to something like stamps when there are a million other subjects to pick from.

You missed one of my main points. The USPS is paying corporations for the rights to use their logos and trademarked characters. I think those public resources would be better spent highlighting our shared history and heritage rather than paying private corporations to promote their intellectual property.

And if we're going to use corporate characters as examples of our shared heritage, we should at least acknowledge that their histories are not always as wholesome or uncomplicated as they are presented. Early Disney animation, including Mickey Mouse, has a documented connection to the traditions of blackface minstrelsy and racial caricature.

For anyone interested in the subject, Nicholas Sammond's Birth of an Industry: Blackface Minstrelsy and the Rise of American Animation is a good place to start. It examines the relationship between minstrelsy and the development of American animation in considerable detail.

My point isn't that these characters have no place in American culture. It's that I would rather see the USPS use its limited resources to tell the stories of the people, places, events, and accomplishments that make up our shared history than spend those resources licensing corporate trademarks.

I rest my case.

You mean your case that this should just be ignored? Good old white privilege......