Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Look to whatever your favorite bastion of progressive expression, mine for example is California. You'll find your freedom alive and well there so long as you are prepared to server your master - the elite and state.
There was some band there who sang about this in the late 80's. Metalli- something.
Serve that master? I say whatever I want. And you don't know what I call a bastion of progressive expression. You know nothing about me. This is what I know. I can say what I want, do what I want. I can live wherever I want. If it's taxes you're speaking of, everyone has to pay those. And I can always get around that.
This was 5 years after the Confederacy was founded. So your point still fails.
Actually, it was more like 3. In 1808, the importing of slaves was banned. CSA never forbade that. Northern states entered into the Union as free states. Southern states, no such thing. Just admit it. History shows that the southern states felt threatened by the idea that the federal government could abolish slavery. The U.S. Constitution might have looked the other way with slavery in the South. However, as time drew nearer during the 1850s and 60s, more and more southern elites felt that their way of live was going to be threatened. Their slave-holding way of life. They were willing to fight a war to keep slavery. USA didn't declare independence from Britain for the expressed desire of slave holding. The CSA, however, had an extreme desire for it.
I personally don't get honoring Confederate soldiers. I figured it was common sense not to honor such a cause.
I recall reading somewhere that it was tolerated in order to bring the South back into the Union and squelch further trouble. Instead of a surly population chewing on defeat, a new set of myths were allowed to grow that gave them a sense of nobility. As time went on, it was easier to buy into that then think about your compatriots enslaving fellow humans beings.
This article said its closest analogy was post WWII France. Instead of pondering defeat and collaboration and the endless recriminations and vendettas that come with it, a myth of the "Resistance" was encouraged so as to unite the nation and move on.
In sum, you trade a proper reckoning of history for stability.
I cannot remember where I read it and am not sure how legit it is, but I found it an interesting explanation.
These monuments to the leaders of the valiant fight against Northern aggression should be preserved and honored. They should remain where they now are -- in the public square.
I trust that this court ruling will be appealed, and that the continuing War of Northern Aggression conducted by the "sore winners" of the North and their "carpet bagger" acolytes in the South will ultimately end in well-deserved defeat.
I would add that this desire to erase history is straight out of Orwell -- a tactic that ISIS, Stalin, Lenin and Hitler would have enthusiastically endorsed. No wonder the Democrats are for it.
Even if they succeed in their efforts to remove the monuments, they will only create a fascination for this new "forbidden fruit" on the part of young people, who will no longer be indifferent to their heritage but rather very interested in it. They will see that they and their ancestors are being insulted. I would not want to be a Democrat running for office in the South if this nonsense continues. Nor would I want to be a Republican who endorses it.
Last edited by dechatelet; 03-07-2017 at 10:19 AM..
Doesn't Nola have bigger issues to deal with than a statue?...
How did it manage to stay up all these years and now it is supposed to go... Wonder why... now.
I'll bet you can't live in SF. You'd better be packing serious cash.
Sure - that's just one silly example. But this city is the true expression of liberalism today. You - and that means "free" you - won't be free there.
You may certainly be a multi-millionaire. And if so, perhaps your version of freedom is just like theirs ; Freedom for me but not you.
And that's just the elites. Then you have the state.
This is what our ancestors died for. Not.
So take down those statues. Hell, they are probably asking for you to do so to avoid being associated with this mess.
So what? This is America. If you don't make the money, freedom has nothing to do with it. I know if I had been in San Francisco in the 1950s, there would have been certain neighborhoods I would have been prohibited from living in as a Black man. And this goes for alot of major cities across America. Today, my money, not my race, determines where I live. How hard I'm willing to work determines that.
How would I not be free in San Francisco? Expensive and not being free aren't the same thing. San Francisco is always going to be expensive. Why? Because it's a desirable place to live. Alot of activities, it's by the sea, and surrounded by water on the other side as well. Hilly, you have good mass transit. If you work in the tech industry, San Francisco attracts techies. And furthermore, it's tiny. Tiny land area + alot of people = going to be expensive no matter what. Conservatives could take that place over and it would still be expensive. Better yet, I live in the Atlanta area. We have some very expensive areas where if you don't make a high income, you can't really live there. Places that aren't zones for apartment complexes, where houses can go for $500,000+. Now, that might be cheap in SF, but wages are lower in Atlanta.
People fought and died for freedom of choice. Not having the money to live in a certain city is not the same as "you're not allowed to live there".
I recall reading somewhere that it was tolerated in order to bring the South back into the Union and squelch further trouble. Instead of a surly population chewing on defeat, a new set of myths were allowed to grow that gave them a sense of nobility. As time went on, it was easier to buy into that then think about your compatriots enslaving fellow humans beings.
This article said its closest analogy was post WWII France. Instead of pondering defeat and collaboration and the endless recriminations and vendettas that come with it, a myth of the "Resistance" was encouraged so as to unite the nation and move on.
In sum, you trade a proper reckoning of history for stability.
I cannot remember where I read it and am not sure how legit it is, but I found it an interesting explanation.
It makes the most sense.
From what I've read, the Confederate States of America were outgunned from the get-to. Even Rhette Butler didn't think they had much of a chance.
Why the working people let the slave owners whip them into fighting a losing war remains a mystery.
But I can see where letting old Confederate soldiers parade around with some of their dignity was viewed as kind enough.
But the last Confederate soldier is long gone. Time to put that stuff in the museum.
So what? This is America. If you don't make the money, freedom has nothing to do with it.
As I say;
Said by me "And if so, perhaps your version of freedom is just like theirs ; Freedom for me but not you."
Country coming apart. Trump is just a symptom, not the sickness. I'd want my statue down taken down too, especially as the wheels come off.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
