old salt wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 1:26 pm
It is important not to erase the history that memorializes what a difficult decision it was for Americans to choose between attacking or defending their home states.
No one is erasing the history. But I think it's not too much to ask to not CELEBRATE active rebellion to protect slavery.
Now you can say that each man fought for their own reason and all that.....but you can't escape the question that so many wish to avoid, and the question that makes each man's motivation for fighting for the South immaterial, as it relates to the outcome.
And that question is: what would have happened if the South won?
And when you answer that question, it becomes obvious to even the most obtuse observer that celebrating these men is, to put it politely, in poor taste.
Some don't want to do that, either, as you very well know. And I gotta say, I don't blame them one bit. But with founding fathers? You can argue it was the time period, blah blah blah....and at least have some reasonableness to what you're saying.
But for those who would have kept Americans in chains for......who can say how many more decades? There's no wiggle room there, IMHO.
These are all opinions, obviously, OS. And the shades of gray you are always telling me that I need to use more, and stop being an "all or nothing" guy...........
1860 was much closer to 1776 than 2021, in more than just years. So let's just erase history & cancel them all. Don't you feel superior now ?
You have really gone off the deep end now OS. Equating the Federal Government of 1861 or even today with the monarchy of King George III is, frankly, off the wall.
Not for nothing, but it might interest you to know that the British crown outlawed slavery in 1833.
As I said, I don't support erasing those Confederates from our history but I do think celebrating them as some sorts of heroic figures isn't appropriate either. Just discovering the other day, that the large portrait of R.E. Lee in the USMA library depicts him in his Confederate uniform illustrates the problem. He is depicted elsewhere at the academy in his U.S. Army uniform which I find appropriate as a former Superintendent while an officer in that same army.
Here's another reading of history....after the defeat of the Confederacy, the South was occupied by U.S. Army troops for over 10 years and none of those former Confederates were commemorated. In fact, Jefferson Davis was imprisoned for two years at Fort Monroe in Virginia. Indicted but never tried for treason, Davis was released on bond in May 1867. Lee and general officers of the Army of Northern Virginia were covered by parole per the terms of the surrender at Appomattox. The heart of the terms was that Confederates would be paroled after surrendering their weapons and other military property whilst keeping their personal animals (horse or mules) and sidearms if surrendered soldiers promised to not take up arms again, the United States government would not prosecute them. Grant also allowed Confederates to keep their mounts and sidearms. The Attorney General of the United States affirmed this in June 1865 for all Confederate officers who surrendered.
The primary reason for the rise of The Lost Cause and Jim Crow was the disputed election of 1876. The Compromise of 1877 was an unwritten deal, informally arranged among United States Congressmen, that settled the intensely disputed 1876 presidential election. It resulted in the United States federal government pulling the last troops out of the South, and ending the Reconstruction Era. Through the Compromise, Republican Rutherford B. Hayes was awarded the White House over Democrat Samuel J. Tilden (the Governor of New York) on the understanding that Hayes would remove the federal troops whose support was essential for the survival of Republican state governments in South Carolina, Florida and Louisiana. Hayes received 185 electoral votes to Tilden's 184 electoral votes. Despite losing the election, Tilden won the popular vote with 4,301,000 votes to 4,036,000 votes for Hayes.
Ironically, this mess also resulted in the Electoral Count Act of 1876 which some of DOPUS' cronies tried to manipulate to overturn the 2020 election. Legal experts decry the wording of the statute and recommend that it me totally re-written to insure that it could not be manipulated to overrule the results of a legitimate election.
Not to digress too much but take 30 minutes a listen to Muhammad Ali on his own history of black and white back in 1971- it's simultaneously sad yet hilarious.
Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 9:04 pm
Who cares about monuments? They’re pretty broke down in Rome and Athens. Worth about the same as Rodney Dangerfields views of golf courses and cemeteries.
Those who understood them to be tools for intimidation and control.
Whether intimidator or targets, they meant and mean a lot. That's why we care.
But sure, in another 2000 years those monuments will be crumbled away.
Should we care?
yes.
Easy answer.
The intimidators remain very very active.
For instance, equality, for those like Salty, is about a loss of power.
He identifies with those who built those statues, named those bases, hung those portraits...all to intimidate and control others.
I should be more clear, I don’t think we should erect tokens that are temporal in nature on any finite geographic space. I wasn’t for throwing up the WW2 memorial in DC which happened right before I left. It’s nice but so was the greenspace. Same for Vietnam. Why do folks even think it makes sense with the celebratory argument and why are they so stupid with respect to the concept that perspectives and cultures change over time? Unless there’s agreement that any one is fair game to knock down at any time, but that’s not the case they’re treated as sacrosanct.
Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 9:04 pm
Who cares about monuments? They’re pretty broke down in Rome and Athens. Worth about the same as Rodney Dangerfields views of golf courses and cemeteries.
Those who understood them to be tools for intimidation and control.
Whether intimidator or targets, they meant and mean a lot. That's why we care.
But sure, in another 2000 years those monuments will be crumbled away.
Should we care?
yes.
Easy answer.
The intimidators remain very very active.
For instance, equality, for those like Salty, is about a loss of power.
He identifies with those who built those statues, named those bases, hung those portraits...all to intimidate and control others.
I'm neither a Planned Parenthood booster nor certainly not a fan of Margaret Sanger.
Being a racist is not limited to white men, white women too!
But it is quite false that the Planned Parenthood of today is locating clinics in areas out of a racist intent, but they do target poverty, where women have difficulty getting good health care. But not at all necessarily African American. Heck, my wife used Planned Parenthood back during her college years over 40 years ago in a poor, nearly entirely white town near Hanover NH, along with other young women at Dartmouth, Colby Sawyer, and more importantly the poor women of that area who had very limited access to confidential birth control, Pap smears, and/or other women's health care during that era.
Had a Catholic girlfriend who’s parents came off the boat from
Ireland in the 60s who got hers in Vestal, NY-the nice town in that janky county (Broome).
Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 9:04 pm
Who cares about monuments? They’re pretty broke down in Rome and Athens. Worth about the same as Rodney Dangerfields views of golf courses and cemeteries.
Those who understood them to be tools for intimidation and control.
Whether intimidator or targets, they meant and mean a lot. That's why we care.
But sure, in another 2000 years those monuments will be crumbled away.
Should we care?
yes.
Easy answer.
The intimidators remain very very active.
For instance, equality, for those like Salty, is about a loss of power.
He identifies with those who built those statues, named those bases, hung those portraits...all to intimidate and control others.
I should be more clear, I don’t think we should erect tokens that are temporal in nature on any finite geographic space. I wasn’t for throwing up the WW2 memorial in DC which happened right before I left. It’s nice but so was the greenspace. Same for Vietnam. Why do folks even think it makes sense with the celebratory argument and why are they so stupid with respect to the concept that perspectives and cultures change over time? Unless there’s agreement that any one is fair game to knock down at any time, but that’s not the case they’re treated as sacrosanct.
That's a fair and consistent view, though the first part is clearly not realistic in a world in which many such decisions have been made, and with human nature, will continue to be made.
The last sentence, however, addresses this reality correctly IMO, all monuments are subject to later review. What were they honoring and why, and should that still be the case are reasonable questions.
Re: Is America a racist nation?
Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2021 11:20 am
by Typical Lax Dad
“Some of them even had that promise printed and signed by officers of the British Army on behalf of the king himself, that the bearer so-and-so was at liberty to go wherever he or she pleased and take up whatever occupation he or she chose. That meant something for people who had been slaves. And the king’s word was surely a bond. In return for their loyal service in the late American war, they were to be granted two gifts of unimaginably precious worth: their freedom and their acres.”
Old Salt believes these black people fighting for the crown in exchange for freedom during the revolutionary war is the same as a confederate fighting for the south hoping to maintain slavery. I can see how that’s the same thing. Looks like the British at least paid up in Nova Scotia. Not sure former slaves here got their 40 acres.
Re: Is America a racist nation?
Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2021 2:02 pm
by tech37
Kismet wrote: ↑Sat Dec 04, 2021 6:53 am
Not to digress too much but take 30 minutes a listen to Muhammad Ali on his own history of black and white back n 1971 - it's simultaneously sad yet hilarious.
Thanks for posting. Ali = true giant on many levels. I was thinking as Ali mocked Smok'in Joe, obviously this interview took place before "the fight of the century." Interesting too how the subject of brain damage came up this early in his career. Some how prescient, and as you mentioned, sad.
old salt wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 1:26 pm
It is important not to erase the history that memorializes what a difficult decision it was for Americans to choose between attacking or defending their home states.
No one is erasing the history. But I think it's not too much to ask to not CELEBRATE active rebellion to protect slavery.
Now you can say that each man fought for their own reason and all that.....but you can't escape the question that so many wish to avoid, and the question that makes each man's motivation for fighting for the South immaterial, as it relates to the outcome.
And that question is: what would have happened if the South won?
And when you answer that question, it becomes obvious to even the most obtuse observer that celebrating these men is, to put it politely, in poor taste.
Some don't want to do that, either, as you very well know. And I gotta say, I don't blame them one bit. But with founding fathers? You can argue it was the time period, blah blah blah....and at least have some reasonableness to what you're saying.
But for those who would have kept Americans in chains for......who can say how many more decades? There's no wiggle room there, IMHO.
These are all opinions, obviously, OS. And the shades of gray you are always telling me that I need to use more, and stop being an "all or nothing" guy...........
1860 was much closer to 1776 than 2021, in more than just years. So let's just erase history & cancel them all. Don't you feel superior now ?
Right OS. History is indelible, good or bad, can't nor should be erased.
old salt wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 1:26 pm
It is important not to erase the history that memorializes what a difficult decision it was for Americans to choose between attacking or defending their home states.
No one is erasing the history. But I think it's not too much to ask to not CELEBRATE active rebellion to protect slavery.
Now you can say that each man fought for their own reason and all that.....but you can't escape the question that so many wish to avoid, and the question that makes each man's motivation for fighting for the South immaterial, as it relates to the outcome.
And that question is: what would have happened if the South won?
And when you answer that question, it becomes obvious to even the most obtuse observer that celebrating these men is, to put it politely, in poor taste.
Some don't want to do that, either, as you very well know. And I gotta say, I don't blame them one bit. But with founding fathers? You can argue it was the time period, blah blah blah....and at least have some reasonableness to what you're saying.
But for those who would have kept Americans in chains for......who can say how many more decades? There's no wiggle room there, IMHO.
These are all opinions, obviously, OS. And the shades of gray you are always telling me that I need to use more, and stop being an "all or nothing" guy...........
1860 was much closer to 1776 than 2021, in more than just years. So let's just erase history & cancel them all. Don't you feel superior now ?
You have really gone off the deep end now OS. Equating the Federal Government of 1861 or even today with the monarchy of King George III is, frankly, off the wall.
Yes. To illustrate the absurdity & inconsistency of the current selective woke revisionist history. We apparently can only time travel back to 1861, except through the Project 1619 portal.
old salt wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 1:26 pm
It is important not to erase the history that memorializes what a difficult decision it was for Americans to choose between attacking or defending their home states.
No one is erasing the history. But I think it's not too much to ask to not CELEBRATE active rebellion to protect slavery.
Now you can say that each man fought for their own reason and all that.....but you can't escape the question that so many wish to avoid, and the question that makes each man's motivation for fighting for the South immaterial, as it relates to the outcome.
And that question is: what would have happened if the South won?
And when you answer that question, it becomes obvious to even the most obtuse observer that celebrating these men is, to put it politely, in poor taste.
Some don't want to do that, either, as you very well know. And I gotta say, I don't blame them one bit. But with founding fathers? You can argue it was the time period, blah blah blah....and at least have some reasonableness to what you're saying.
But for those who would have kept Americans in chains for......who can say how many more decades? There's no wiggle room there, IMHO.
These are all opinions, obviously, OS. And the shades of gray you are always telling me that I need to use more, and stop being an "all or nothing" guy...........
1860 was much closer to 1776 than 2021, in more than just years. So let's just erase history & cancel them all. Don't you feel superior now ?
Right OS. History is indelible, good or bad, can't nor should be erased.
If this is all it is, we'd have statues of Yamamoto up in Pearl Harbor. Because you two think History is indelible, good or bad, and can't nor should be erased. "Here's a bust of the guy who planned this attack on Pearl Harbor"...because, as you say, it's just history, good or bad, right?
Let's try your plan, fellas, and see how US Veterans handle this idea of yours.
Or more directly----do you two think we should have just left the swastika banners hanging in Madison Square Garden after the pro-Nazi rally that was held there in 1939? After all, it's just a piece of history, right, guys?
You can depict a bust of Yamamoto or show Swastikas in American history museums until the cows come home, and you both know it.
So really, just stop pretending like you don't get this issue.
old salt wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 1:26 pm
It is important not to erase the history that memorializes what a difficult decision it was for Americans to choose between attacking or defending their home states.
No one is erasing the history. But I think it's not too much to ask to not CELEBRATE active rebellion to protect slavery.
Now you can say that each man fought for their own reason and all that.....but you can't escape the question that so many wish to avoid, and the question that makes each man's motivation for fighting for the South immaterial, as it relates to the outcome.
And that question is: what would have happened if the South won?
And when you answer that question, it becomes obvious to even the most obtuse observer that celebrating these men is, to put it politely, in poor taste.
Some don't want to do that, either, as you very well know. And I gotta say, I don't blame them one bit. But with founding fathers? You can argue it was the time period, blah blah blah....and at least have some reasonableness to what you're saying.
But for those who would have kept Americans in chains for......who can say how many more decades? There's no wiggle room there, IMHO.
These are all opinions, obviously, OS. And the shades of gray you are always telling me that I need to use more, and stop being an "all or nothing" guy...........
1860 was much closer to 1776 than 2021, in more than just years. So let's just erase history & cancel them all. Don't you feel superior now ?
You have really gone off the deep end now OS. Equating the Federal Government of 1861 or even today with the monarchy of King George III is, frankly, off the wall.
Yes. To illustrate the absurdity & inconsistency of the current selective woke revisionist history. We apparently can only time travel back to 1861, except through the Project 1619 portal.
If the “winners” write history, maybe we should expect periodic re-writes by the current crop of “winners”?
Re: Is America a racist nation?
Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2021 2:44 pm
by old salt
a fan wrote: ↑Sat Dec 04, 2021 2:37 pm
If this is all it is, we'd have statues of Yamamoto up in Pearl Harbor. Because you two think History is indelible, good or bad, and can't nor should be erased. "Here's a bust of the guy who planned this attack on Pearl Harbor"...because, as you say, it's just history, good or bad, right?
Let's try your plan, fellas, and see how US Veterans handle this idea of yours.
...if Japan had won WW II & HI was now Japanese territory.
US Veterans organizations are not leading the charge to pull down statues.
old salt wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 1:26 pm
It is important not to erase the history that memorializes what a difficult decision it was for Americans to choose between attacking or defending their home states.
No one is erasing the history. But I think it's not too much to ask to not CELEBRATE active rebellion to protect slavery.
Now you can say that each man fought for their own reason and all that.....but you can't escape the question that so many wish to avoid, and the question that makes each man's motivation for fighting for the South immaterial, as it relates to the outcome.
And that question is: what would have happened if the South won?
And when you answer that question, it becomes obvious to even the most obtuse observer that celebrating these men is, to put it politely, in poor taste.
Some don't want to do that, either, as you very well know. And I gotta say, I don't blame them one bit. But with founding fathers? You can argue it was the time period, blah blah blah....and at least have some reasonableness to what you're saying.
But for those who would have kept Americans in chains for......who can say how many more decades? There's no wiggle room there, IMHO.
These are all opinions, obviously, OS. And the shades of gray you are always telling me that I need to use more, and stop being an "all or nothing" guy...........
1860 was much closer to 1776 than 2021, in more than just years. So let's just erase history & cancel them all. Don't you feel superior now ?
You have really gone off the deep end now OS. Equating the Federal Government of 1861 or even today with the monarchy of King George III is, frankly, off the wall.
Yes. To illustrate the absurdity & inconsistency of the current selective woke revisionist history. We apparently can only time travel back to 1861, except through the Project 1619 portal.
Lousy analogy. Oversimplification at its worst. You seem to support History for lemmings. In addition, I have not seen
...and you continue to be off the deep end. Truly 21st Century Theatre of the Absurd.
I don't think most people are advocating destruction of these monuments - only suggesting that perhaps be relocated to museums where they can be displayed with some relevant context. Nowhere have I seen suggestions about Washington and Jefferson Memorials - so that's your hyperbole to justify whatever rational point you are trying to make which is, so far, lost on me.
Re: Is America a racist nation?
Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2021 2:46 pm
by a fan
old salt wrote: ↑Sat Dec 04, 2021 2:30 pm
Yes. To illustrate the absurdity & inconsistency of the current selective woke revisionist history.
It's only inconsistent if you're playing games, and working feverishly to act like you can't possibly understand why SOME---not all----of your fellow Americans might be offended by celebrating Americans who fought to keep them in chains.
If what YOU are asserting was remotely true---that these statues are about history and nothing else-----we'd have statues of Hitler in American towns, and no one would care. After all, he's a big piece of American History, right? He affected an entire generation of Americans, right?
So OBVIOUSLY, we should put statues of Hitler up so that we don't "erase" that part of our history, right?
old salt wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 1:26 pm
It is important not to erase the history that memorializes what a difficult decision it was for Americans to choose between attacking or defending their home states.
No one is erasing the history. But I think it's not too much to ask to not CELEBRATE active rebellion to protect slavery.
Now you can say that each man fought for their own reason and all that.....but you can't escape the question that so many wish to avoid, and the question that makes each man's motivation for fighting for the South immaterial, as it relates to the outcome.
And that question is: what would have happened if the South won?
And when you answer that question, it becomes obvious to even the most obtuse observer that celebrating these men is, to put it politely, in poor taste.
Some don't want to do that, either, as you very well know. And I gotta say, I don't blame them one bit. But with founding fathers? You can argue it was the time period, blah blah blah....and at least have some reasonableness to what you're saying.
But for those who would have kept Americans in chains for......who can say how many more decades? There's no wiggle room there, IMHO.
These are all opinions, obviously, OS. And the shades of gray you are always telling me that I need to use more, and stop being an "all or nothing" guy...........
1860 was much closer to 1776 than 2021, in more than just years. So let's just erase history & cancel them all. Don't you feel superior now ?
You have really gone off the deep end now OS. Equating the Federal Government of 1861 or even today with the monarchy of King George III is, frankly, off the wall.
Yes. To illustrate the absurdity & inconsistency of the current selective woke revisionist history. We apparently can only time travel back to 1861, except through the Project 1619 portal.
old salt wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 1:26 pm
It is important not to erase the history that memorializes what a difficult decision it was for Americans to choose between attacking or defending their home states.
No one is erasing the history. But I think it's not too much to ask to not CELEBRATE active rebellion to protect slavery.
Now you can say that each man fought for their own reason and all that.....but you can't escape the question that so many wish to avoid, and the question that makes each man's motivation for fighting for the South immaterial, as it relates to the outcome.
And that question is: what would have happened if the South won?
And when you answer that question, it becomes obvious to even the most obtuse observer that celebrating these men is, to put it politely, in poor taste.
Some don't want to do that, either, as you very well know. And I gotta say, I don't blame them one bit. But with founding fathers? You can argue it was the time period, blah blah blah....and at least have some reasonableness to what you're saying.
But for those who would have kept Americans in chains for......who can say how many more decades? There's no wiggle room there, IMHO.
These are all opinions, obviously, OS. And the shades of gray you are always telling me that I need to use more, and stop being an "all or nothing" guy...........
1860 was much closer to 1776 than 2021, in more than just years. So let's just erase history & cancel them all. Don't you feel superior now ?
Right OS. History is indelible, good or bad, can't nor should be erased.
If this is all it is, we'd have statues of Yamamoto up in Pearl Harbor. Because you two think History is indelible, good or bad, and can't nor should be erased. "Here's a bust of the guy who planned this attack on Pearl Harbor"...because, as you say, it's just history, good or bad, right?
Let's try your plan, fellas, and see how US Veterans handle this idea of yours.
Or more directly----do you two think we should have just left the swastika banners hanging in Madison Square Garden after the pro-Nazi rally that was held there in 1939? After all, it's just a piece of history, right, guys?
You can depict a bust of Yamamoto or show Swastikas in American history museums until the cows come home, and you both know it.
So really, just stop pretending like you don't get this issue.
Sure, go ahead and qualify historic things all you want but then let people make up their own minds. But simply wipe it out? Like it or not, it's all part and parcel of who we are.
Did you sympathize with ISIS in their attempt to erase history by destroying ancient relics?
old salt wrote: ↑Sat Dec 04, 2021 2:30 pm
Yes. To illustrate the absurdity & inconsistency of the current selective woke revisionist history.
It's only inconsistent if you're playing games, and working feverishly to act like you can't possibly understand why SOME---not all----of your fellow Americans might be offended by celebrating Americans who fought to keep them in chains.
If what YOU are asserting was remotely true---that these statues are about history and nothing else-----we'd have statues of Hitler in American towns, and no one would care. After all, he's a big piece of American History, right? He affected an entire generation of Americans, right?
So OBVIOUSLY, we should put statues of Hitler up so that we don't "erase" that part of our history, right?
a fan wrote: ↑Sat Dec 04, 2021 2:37 pm
If this is all it is, we'd have statues of Yamamoto up in Pearl Harbor. Because you two think History is indelible, good or bad, and can't nor should be erased. "Here's a bust of the guy who planned this attack on Pearl Harbor"...because, as you say, it's just history, good or bad, right?
Let's try your plan, fellas, and see how US Veterans handle this idea of yours.
...if Japan had won WW II & HI was now Japanese territory.
So you changed your mind? Ten seconds ago, you were defending having statues for the losing side in a war with America? Confederates.
Now that I change things over to Japan, you see the light? You GET why we don't have statues of Yamamoto in Pearl Harbor to tell that part of history.
OS, my man. You're better than this.
old salt wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 11:01 pm
US Veterans organizations are not leading the charge to pull down statues.
Well look who arrived at the party! Yes, that's right.
Why aren't US Veterans not leading the charge to pull down statues, OS.
Answer: because we weren't stupid enough to put up statues of the defeated enemy----celebrating their history-----in the first place.
a fan wrote: ↑Sat Dec 04, 2021 2:37 pm
If this is all it is, we'd have statues of Yamamoto up in Pearl Harbor. Because you two think History is indelible, good or bad, and can't nor should be erased. "Here's a bust of the guy who planned this attack on Pearl Harbor"...because, as you say, it's just history, good or bad, right?
Let's try your plan, fellas, and see how US Veterans handle this idea of yours.
...if Japan had won WW II & HI was now Japanese territory.
So you changed your mind? Ten seconds ago, you were defending having statues for the losing side in a war with America? Confederates.
Now that I change things over to Japan, you see the light? You GET why we don't have statues of Yamamoto in Pearl Harbor to tell that part of history.
OS, my man. You're better than this.
old salt wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 11:01 pm
US Veterans organizations are not leading the charge to pull down statues.
Well look who arrived at the party! Yes, that's right.
Why aren't US Veterans not leading the charge to pull down statues, OS.
Answer: because we weren't stupid enough to put up statues of the defeated enemy----celebrating their history-----in the first place.
...as a Planned Parenthood booster, are you ready to remove Margaret Sanger's portrait & statue ?