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.
Why the Confederate supporters want to remind people of a loss war is beyond comprehension. After the war all symbols of the Confederacy should have been banned. That's how losers and traitors should have been treated.
That along with the fact that Union forces captured New Orleans early in the Civil War without a battle in the city itself.
why don't they just get over it? Why are they protesting? And you asked did the people vote...YES, they voted for the officials that decided to take the slave symbols down.
Why would a confederate statue coming down stir up "race hate"?...it's an inanimate object that symbolizes slavery and it's symbolizes being un-American.
Removing Confederate monuments from American public spaces is metaphorically (& in some cases literally) taking the Confederacy down off its pedestal.
It never should've been 'put up on a pedestal' to begin with.
In CSA VP Stephens 'Cornerstone Speech', he accuses the USA of anchoring & building its government on "sandy foundations".
Mr. Stephens claimed where the USA was wrong or mistaken, the CSA would correct. He claimed the USA was wrong to believe that "enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically."
He accused the USA of "attempting to make things equal which the Creator had made unequal."
MrStephens vowed the CSA would correct that erroneous belief & that "Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests upon the great truth, that the negro is not equal to the white."
Alexander Stephens, Vice President of the Confederate States of America
Cornerstone Speech
Savannah, Georgia
March 21, 1861
Quote:
...But not to be tedious in enumerating the numerous changes for the better, allow me to allude to one other -- though last, not least. The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution -- African slavery as it exists amongst us -- the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the "rock upon which the old Union would split." He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact. But whether he fully comprehended the great truth upon which that rock stood and stands, may be doubted. The prevailing ideas entertained by him and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old constitution, were that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with, but the general opinion of the men of that day was that, somehow or other in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away. This idea, though not incorporated in the constitution, was the prevailing idea at that time. The constitution, it is true, secured every essential guarantee to the institution while it should last, and hence no argument can be justly urged against the constitutional guarantees thus secured, because of the common sentiment of the day. Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the government built upon it fell when the "storm came and the wind blew."
Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests upon the great truth, that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery -- subordination to the superior race -- is his natural and normal condition. [Applause.] This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth. This truth has been slow in the process of its development, like all other truths in the various departments of science. It has been so even amongst us. Many who hear me, perhaps, can recollect well, that this truth was not generally admitted, even within their day. The errors of the past generation still clung to many as late as twenty years ago. Those at the North, who still cling to these errors, with a zeal above knowledge, we justly denominate fanatics. All fanaticism springs from an aberration of the mind -- from a defect in reasoning. It is a species of insanity. One of the most striking characteristics of insanity, in many instances, is forming correct conclusions from fancied or erroneous premises; so with the anti-slavery fanatics; their conclusions are right if their premises were. They assume that the negro is equal, and hence conclude that he is entitled to equal privileges and rights with the white man. If their premises were correct, their conclusions would be logical and just -- but their premise being wrong, their whole argument fails. I recollect once of having heard a gentleman from one of the northern States, of great power and ability, announce in the House of Representatives, with imposing effect, that we of the South would be compelled, ultimately, to yield upon this subject of slavery, that it was as impossible to war successfully against a principle in politics, as it was in physics or mechanics. That the principle would ultimately prevail. That we, in maintaining slavery as it exists with us, were warring against a principle, a principle founded in nature, the principle of the equality of men. The reply I made to him was, that upon his own grounds, we should, ultimately, succeed, and that he and his associates, in this crusade against our institutions, would ultimately fail. The truth announced, that it was as impossible to war successfully against a principle in politics as it was in physics and mechanics, I admitted; but told him that it was he, and those acting with him, who were warring against a principle. They were attempting to make things equal which the Creator had made unequal. ...
The Confederate Declarations of Secession are clear...the CSA was seceding because they thought black people were inferior, were therefore slaves, and the north threatened these two great truths.
I understand, and see your point (also, NO is about my favorite place on Earth) but it's different (to me) when taking down statues that have long stood, from preventing something that might cause bad feelings to go up in the first place. No, it's not book burning, but would you advocate removing discussions of slavery or secession from textbooks because it might make some people feel bad?
As I said, I wasn't outraged by this. Just don't think it's a great idea. If the majority of people in NO wanted them gone, they have that right.
I would not advocate removing discussions of slavery and secession from textbooks. As a teacher I encourage such discussions in my class.
Taking down a statue does not bar anyone from discussing it and simply says that this no longer represents us.
Quote:
Originally Posted by banjomike
Their town, their rules.
Yep. And if the decision was unpopular then the local officials will pay at the ballot box - and I don't think they will.
Removing Confederate monuments from American public spaces is metaphorically (& in some cases literally) taking the Confederacy down off its pedestal.
It never should've been 'put up on a pedestal' to begin with.
In CSA VP Stephens 'Cornerstone Speech', he accuses the USA of anchoring & building its government on "sandy foundations".
Mr. Stephens claimed where the USA was wrong or mistaken, the CSA would correct. He claimed the USA was wrong to believe that "enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically."
He accused the USA of "attempting to make things equal which the Creator had made unequal."
MrStephens vowed the CSA would correct that erroneous belief & that "Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests upon the great truth, that the negro is not equal to the white."
Alexander Stephens, Vice President of the Confederate States of America
Cornerstone Speech
Savannah, Georgia
March 21, 1861
This is what was 'put up on a pedestal' - White Supremacy.
The fact that few people seem to understand this makes the situation more maddening. Taking that statue off its pedestal meant that it's understood that some individuals do not deserve to be honored.
The fact that few people seem to understand this makes the situation more maddening. Taking that statue off its pedestal meant that it's understood that some individuals do not deserve to be honored.
Agree it's maddening & at the same time, saddening too.
Another member here spoke about folks being 'railroaded' into fighting a war against their brothers. Honestly, I'm uncertain of her point? Or even if I've understood the gist?
From my perspective, the American Civil War was a Civil War therefore, by definition, it was brother at war with brother, American people at war with American people.
Were the folks back then 'railroaded' into fighting each other? Over the right to own people as property? To preserve the Union of States of America? To preserve white supremacy?
Folks back then were 'railroaded' into believing the Lost Cause revisionist history. Some folks're still getting railroaded.
They & we all lost. They're all gone now, & we're all still losing.
Agree it's maddening & at the same time, saddening too.
Another member here spoke about folks being 'railroaded' into fighting a war against their brothers. Honestly, I'm uncertain of her point? Or even if I've understood the gist?
From my perspective, the American Civil War was a Civil War therefore, by definition, it was brother at war with brother, American people at war with American people.
Were the folks back then 'railroaded' into fighting each other? Over the right to own people as property? To preserve the Union of States of America? To preserve white supremacy?
Folks back then were 'railroaded' into believing the Lost Cause revisionist history. Some folks're still getting railroaded.
They & we all lost. They're all gone now, & we're all still losing.
James McPherson's Battle Cry of Freedom is a good book. There is a part where he shows several southern leaders at all levels telling poor white southerners that the cause is white supremacy. That if the slaves are freed that they will rape your wife, marry your daughter, kill your son, and steal your job from you. Etc... And that Lincoln and his "black republicans" would free the slaves within 10 years - even though he had only said he would stop the expansion of slavery by 1860.
Charles Dew's Apostles of Disunion is also a good book on this matter.
James McPherson's Battle Cry of Freedom is a good book. There is a part where he shows several southern leaders at all levels telling poor white southerners that the cause is white supremacy. That if the slaves are freed that they will rape your wife, marry your daughter, kill your son, and steal your job from you. Etc... And that Lincoln and his "black republicans" would free the slaves within 10 years - even though he had only said he would stop the expansion of slavery by 1860.
Charles Dew's Apostles of Disunion is also a good book on this matter.
Thanks & respect for your recommendations, much appreciated! I've read most of Mr. McPherson's valuable works, & Eric Foner's as well, they're amongst my favorite authors. (W. E. B. Du Bois is another irreplaceable & very valuable voice.) I will get & read 'Apostles of Disunion' on your endorsement.
Agree it's maddening & at the same time, saddening too.
Another member here spoke about folks being 'railroaded' into fighting a war against their brothers. Honestly, I'm uncertain of her point? Or even if I've understood the gist?
From my perspective, the American Civil War was a Civil War therefore, by definition, it was brother at war with brother, American people at war with American people.
Were the folks back then 'railroaded' into fighting each other? Over the right to own people as property? To preserve the Union of States of America? To preserve white supremacy?
Folks back then were 'railroaded' into believing the Lost Cause revisionist history. Some folks're still getting railroaded.
They & we all lost. They're all gone now, & we're all still losing.
... more than you know ....
The States are all linked together, bound together and there is no legal document that will allow one state to stand alone, withdrawn from the union. States speak of succession today, even knowing they can't do it and it's crazy.
People are taking this personal and it wasn't personal, it was a way of life that had/has been going on for over 3000 years (still goes on today in some parts of the world, 11 girls kidnapped and sold into slavery, Africa news) Social evolution was going on at the same time as the American Civil War ...
Another thing that has been going on for over 3000 years is taxes. Taxes paid to the Pharaohs and the Kings and Christ kicking over the money changers tables in the Church, because the collection of state taxes does not belong in the church. Give that to Caesars, which is Caesar's and give to God that which is His. Christ scared the powers that be, because he had followers, (growing in number through love from all walks of life) independent ones, that wished to stand separate from the state and sought freedom, rather than slavery ... to the governments.
Until people know, they don't know and that is where we are today ... the same as we were yesterday. Nothing will change until the people change ... (tearing down monuments and removing statues, does nothing to enact the change needed, but it does do something.)
It looks like the state of Alabama just passed a law that you can't take down any of their statues. Good for them.
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.
I've read most of Mr. McPherson's valuable works, & Eric Foner's as well, they're amongst my favorite authors. (W. E. B. Du Bois is another irreplaceable & very valuable voice.) I will get & read 'Apostles of Disunion' on your endorsement. 