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.
“Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.”
― George Orwell, 1984
Try as they might those who would attempt to control the past cannot force the Constitution of the Confederate States of America down some contrived 'memory hole'. It's still there in black & white:
Quote:
As far as slave-owning rights go, however, the document is much more effective. Four different clauses entrench the legality of slavery in a number of different ways, and together they virtually guarantee that any sort of anti-slave law or policy would be unconstitutional. People can claim the Civil War was "not about slavery" as much as they want, but the fact remains that anyone who fought for the Confederacy was fighting for a country in which a universal right to own slaves was one of the most entrenched laws of the land.
“Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.”
― George Orwell, 1984
Try as they might those who would attempt to control the past cannot force the Constitution of the Confederate States of America down some contrived 'memory hole'. It's still there in black & white:
Quote:
As far as slave-owning rights go, however, the document is much more effective. Four different clauses entrench the legality of slavery in a number of different ways, and together they virtually guarantee that any sort of anti-slave law or policy would be unconstitutional. People can claim the Civil War was "not about slavery" as much as they want, but the fact remains that anyone who fought for the Confederacy was fighting for a country in which a universal right to own slaves was one of the most entrenched laws of the land.
See for yourself, it's never too late to think for yourself.
It depends on a person's definition of what 'freedom' and 'slave' means to them. If a person believes becoming a citizen and paying to their government an individual tax of their earnings from their labor, then they're good, they consider themselves freemen. If a person believes the first fruits of their labor should be theirs to keep, as they earned it, then they consider their labor is not of their own.
A 3000 year old social economic construct that was not immoral, but ordained by God and was the law of the land. A people who believed their master, God Almighty, with whom they are to serve is a greater master than a government. They fought for their individual right to have a choice and let their conscience be their guide in how they were to live their lives. When one takes into account that none of the confederated documents reinstates the Trans Slave Trade, then we can also see, in what path their conscience was guiding them. (evolution, takes time)
Then we have the economic side of it, in how are they going to produce, pay labor wages and create a sustainable living? (today that economics of labor has been replaced by immigrants, low wages) The pro and con arguments on free slave labor where carried out from city to state to the federal government level, which shows they were trying to figure it out. (just as we have immigrant pro - con economic arguments today, as well as the humanitarian thing to do, which we suck at)
Control of the narrative ...
“George Orwell 1984 – Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered, and the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped, nothing exists except and endless present In which the Party is always right.”
“Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.”
― George Orwell, 1984
When we learn (the rest of the story as it was told) beyond that which the government would have us learn, the government looses its control over the narrative and we are indeed, thinking for ourselves. To destroy all records of history, the government carries control of the narrative and we cease to have our own understanding of events, but that which the government wants us to know. Where is the freedom in that?
What changed?
States rely on federal money assistance and can no longer have laws that pertain to their state interests without having to go through the federal government for the official okay. Because of the former, they are okay with the later ...
An individual can not out right own their property, where as a property tax insures government ownership. With individual tax on labor and tax on all property, where is the economic freedom in that?
Now if one takes into account that the states collect tax on individuals and their property ... ?
There isn't a white and black answer to any of it, but people and their prospective, based on the information they have at the time that the have it.
What does being a freeman mean? The answer to that varies.
150+ years ago there was an acceptable way of life that people no longer believes is acceptable and they cast judgment on them for it. In 150 years from now that society will be us. We worry about that as much now, as they did then.
Last edited by Ellis Bell; 04-03-2019 at 11:31 AM..
Reason: ()
and then i see other that want to start a fight over seeing a flag that not on their property or having anything to do with them, like a bull seeing red, but at the time the flag wasnt causing any harm, maybe they are the ones with the problem.
You are not getting the point. This is not about whether or not the Confederate flag is causing harm. We're talking about cultural perceptions, the cultural disconnect, and how this is driven by race.
As Frederick Douglas succinctly put it, "I shall never forget the difference between those who fought for liberty and those who fought for slavery.”
Why stubbornly insist on forgetting the difference?
"If just removing statues and icons doesn’t force a change in outlook, venerating and fetishizing them, and refusing to be honest about their meaning, almost ensures that the country won’t fully confront its past.
Why are some of US still fetishizing the Confederacy?
Why are some of US still refusing to be honest about its meaning?
It took time, but in Germany, the general consensus was that the Nazis were wrong and no honors should be given to them. At the end of WWII, Germany went through a de-Nazification.
In the South, so much fetishizing of Confederates took place after the war was over. Even if there had been punishments handed down, the "Lost Cause" narrative would have come up. At the time there were no Confederate statues to take down. Most were erected during the 1890s and after.
The South of 1865 vs Germany of 1945 were very similar. However, the losses were different. Germany was a country in ruins. The South was a region in ruins. Rebuilding Germany was a different process than rebuilding the South.
-Germany had to rebuild their economy, keep the schools running, and administer the cities, in their own country. The people did what they had to do.
-In the South, the old economy relied on slavery, alot of people didn't go to school, and many people lived in the countryside and not the cities.
Re-educating the South would have been even harder than re-educating Germany. Germany lost alot, but it could be rebuilt. It was a matter of "we'll help you, but some things have to change". In the South, what which was lost could never come back, and it was what it was fighting for. Its antebellum, slavery way of life was gone for good. For Germany, the Nazi era was a relatively short (but horrible) part of its history. For the South, slavery was basically its way of life going back to the founding of the USA. I think there would have been many who would rather starve than admit "we were wrong". If anything, that could have intensified the "Lost Cause" myth.
“Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.”
― George Orwell, 1984
Try as they might those who would attempt to control the past cannot force the Constitution of the Confederate States of America down some contrived 'memory hole'. It's still there in black & white:
See for yourself, it's never too late to think for yourself.
I've read the Confederate Constitution. I've put it on some forums for people to read. Sadly, some people choose not to read it. No one is saying "don't fly the Confederate flag". What is being said is this. You cannot deny that the Confederate cause was heavily rooted in keeping slavery. It is spelled out in the Confederate Constitution and in the Articles of Secession. and no one has been able to prove the opposite.
Someone once said that history is written by the winners. In the case of the American Civil War, and the Confederate cause, the losers wrote that history. The winners didn't write that. The Confederate Constitution and the Articles of Secession were written by the losers of that war. And now the losers try to re-write history. Sorry, no can do.
The truth is out there, and there are no excuses. One can't claim ignorance anymore.
Because history isn't viewed solely from a black viewpoint. Even now.
Well, this is how I see it. There is only one way to view the Confederate cause. It is based on what the Confederate Constitution and the Articles of Secession say. That tells me much more than what "southern heritage" could tell me.
It took time, but in Germany, the general consensus was that the Nazis were wrong and no honors should be given to them. At the end of WWII, Germany went through a de-Nazification.
In the South, so much fetishizing of Confederates took place after the war was over. Even if there had been punishments handed down, the "Lost Cause" narrative would have come up. At the time there were no Confederate statues to take down. Most were erected during the 1890s and after.
The South of 1865 vs Germany of 1945 were very similar. However, the losses were different. Germany was a country in ruins. The South was a region in ruins. Rebuilding Germany was a different process than rebuilding the South.
-Germany had to rebuild their economy, keep the schools running, and administer the cities, in their own country. The people did what they had to do.
-In the South, the old economy relied on slavery, alot of people didn't go to school, and many people lived in the countryside and not the cities.
Re-educating the South would have been even harder than re-educating Germany. Germany lost alot, but it could be rebuilt. It was a matter of "we'll help you, but some things have to change". In the South, what which was lost could never come back, and it was what it was fighting for. Its antebellum, slavery way of life was gone for good. For Germany, the Nazi era was a relatively short (but horrible) part of its history. For the South, slavery was basically its way of life going back to the founding of the USA. I think there would have been many who would rather starve than admit "we were wrong". If anything, that could have intensified the "Lost Cause" myth.
Thank you for your thoughtful & well reasoned response, I respect & appreciate.
I think what you are attempting here is more than legitimate, it's similar to what the folks from the Anti-Defamation League mean when they say "The best way to fight hate speech is with better speech."
After the American Civil War, the Confederates were 'ripe' for the mythologies of the 'Lost Cause' narratives. Their revised history created martyrs, particularly if one was/is able to ignore their 'cause' & was/is willing to do it with a straight face.
Even today, it continues to be a harmful movement of sorts.
Hey, there's nothing wrong with the idea, concept, & practice of free speech. Although it's worth noting the community is not somehow magically improved when jacka$$es are exercising.
It depends on a person's definition of what 'freedom' and 'slave' means to them. If a person believes becoming a citizen and paying to their government an individual tax of their earnings from their labor, then they're good, they consider themselves freemen. If a person believes the first fruits of their labor should be theirs to keep, as they earned it, then they consider their labor is not of their own.
A 3000 year old social economic construct that was not immoral, but ordained by God and was the law of the land. A people who believed their master, God Almighty, with whom they are to serve is a greater master than a government. They fought for their individual right to have a choice and let their conscience be their guide in how they were to live their lives. When one takes into account that none of the confederated documents reinstates the Trans Slave Trade, then we can also see, in what path their conscience was guiding them. (evolution, takes time)
Then we have the economic side of it, in how are they going to produce, pay labor wages and create a sustainable living? (today that economics of labor has been replaced by immigrants, low wages) The pro and con arguments on free slave labor where carried out from city to state to the federal government level, which shows they were trying to figure it out. (just as we have immigrant pro - con economic arguments today, as well as the humanitarian thing to do, which we suck at)
Control of the narrative ...
“George Orwell 1984 – Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered, and the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped, nothing exists except and endless present In which the Party is always right.”
“Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.”
― George Orwell, 1984
When we learn (the rest of the story as it was told) beyond that which the government would have us learn, the government looses its control over the narrative and we are indeed, thinking for ourselves. To destroy all records of history, the government carries control of the narrative and we cease to have our own understanding of events, but that which the government wants us to know. Where is the freedom in that?
What changed?
States rely on federal money assistance and can no longer have laws that pertain to their state interests without having to go through the federal government for the official okay. Because of the former, they are okay with the later ...
An individual can not out right own their property, where as a property tax insures government ownership. With individual tax on labor and tax on all property, where is the economic freedom in that?
Now if one takes into account that the states collect tax on individuals and their property ... ?
There isn't a white and black answer to any of it, but people and their prospective, based on the information they have at the time that the have it.
What does being a freeman mean? The answer to that varies.
150+ years ago there was an acceptable way of life that people no longer believes is acceptable and they cast judgment on them for it. In 150 years from now that society will be us. We worry about that as much now, as they did then.
I don't really understand the flow of your thoughts here? What are you trying to say? What are your straight forward points? I'm particularly confused about your notions about God? I was taught in Catholic schools, both grammar & high school, but not in college. Now I'm mostly a Jesus loving agnostic. Is God a bully of sorts? Is that what you're saying here? I'm confused by the notions.
It depends on a person's definition of what 'freedom' and 'slave' means to them. If a person believes becoming a citizen and paying to their government an individual tax of their earnings from their labor, then they're good, they consider themselves freemen. If a person believes the first fruits of their labor should be theirs to keep, as they earned it, then they consider their labor is not of their own.
A 3000 year old social economic construct that was not immoral, but ordained by God and was the law of the land. A people who believed their master, God Almighty, with whom they are to serve is a greater master than a government. They fought for their individual right to have a choice and let their conscience be their guide in how they were to live their lives. When one takes into account that none of the confederated documents reinstates the Trans Slave Trade, then we can also see, in what path their conscience was guiding them. (evolution, takes time)
Then we have the economic side of it, in how are they going to produce, pay labor wages and create a sustainable living? (today that economics of labor has been replaced by immigrants, low wages) The pro and con arguments on free slave labor where carried out from city to state to the federal government level, which shows they were trying to figure it out. (just as we have immigrant pro - con economic arguments today, as well as the humanitarian thing to do, which we suck at)
Control of the narrative ...
“George Orwell 1984 – Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered, and the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped, nothing exists except and endless present In which the Party is always right.”
“Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.”
― George Orwell, 1984
When we learn (the rest of the story as it was told) beyond that which the government would have us learn, the government looses its control over the narrative and we are indeed, thinking for ourselves. To destroy all records of history, the government carries control of the narrative and we cease to have our own understanding of events, but that which the government wants us to know. Where is the freedom in that?
What changed?
States rely on federal money assistance and can no longer have laws that pertain to their state interests without having to go through the federal government for the official okay. Because of the former, they are okay with the later ...
An individual can not out right own their property, where as a property tax insures government ownership. With individual tax on labor and tax on all property, where is the economic freedom in that?
Now if one takes into account that the states collect tax on individuals and their property ... ?
There isn't a white and black answer to any of it, but people and their prospective, based on the information they have at the time that the have it.
What does being a freeman mean? The answer to that varies.
150+ years ago there was an acceptable way of life that people no longer believes is acceptable and they cast judgment on them for it. In 150 years from now that society will be us. We worry about that as much now, as they did then.
Do you actually believe what you're posting or are you just trying to be contrarian? Do you actually believe it's acceptable to compare chattel slavery with taxation? And if so, what does that prove?
Thank you for your thoughtful & well reasoned response, I respect & appreciate.
I think what you are attempting here is more than legitimate, it's similar to what the folks from the Anti-Defamation League mean when they say "The best way to fight hate speech is with better speech."
After the American Civil War, the Confederates were 'ripe' for the mythologies of the 'Lost Cause' narratives. Their revised history created martyrs, particularly if one was/is able to ignore their 'cause' & was/is willing to do it with a straight face.
Even today, it continues to be a harmful movement of sorts.
Hey, there's nothing wrong with the idea, concept, & practice of free speech. Although it's worth noting the community is not somehow magically improved when jacka$$es are exercising.
Thank you. What I was trying to do was explain why the Lost Cause myth would have taken place anyway. In Germany, they tore down everything that was reminiscent of the Nazi era. In the South, there was not much to tear down. In Germany, you could come up with better speech because there was plenty to tear down. Combating bad speech with better speech was easier. People could see that Hitler no longer represented the progress and freedom they thought he would. The mindset might have still been there, but they realized that if they wanted a prosperous, orderly nation again, they would have to do differently.
In the South, there were no statues. There were certainly flags. However, they weren't hanging until after Reconstruction ended. You couldn't combat the Lost Cause because it had not come around yet. You could certainly combat the KKK. There were plenty of bad things around. However, it was a different level, and a different mindset. In Germany, many people could deny it, until they were shown those films. In the South, there was no denial. Instead of combating denial, you would have to combat rage.
The Lost Cause would have cropped up, simply because it was in the works. I think this Lost Cause would have been different. Fighting a Civil War is different from WWII. It's literally one country, but two factions at war. Germany was at war with countries around it. The South wanted its slave-owning way of life back. The Lost Cause myth would have been about blaming Blacks for the condition that the South was in. It wouldn't just be about blaming northerners.
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.
