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.
Thank you middle-age-mom. Tearing down Confederate monuments is not tearing down history in this case. It is the understanding that some people are more deserving of accolades than others. Germany understood that the Nazis/Hitler were horrible. It was understood that in order to move on, this meant tearing down monuments/accolades to the Nazis. The Holocaust remembered by teaching people about it.
The same should be the case about the Civil War. The Confederates should be remembered, but not as heroes. They should never be venerated or given any public places of honor. Putting a Confederate general's statue in front of a courthouse is saying "we honor Confederate generals and what they stand for". Tearing it down says "this Confederate general doesn't deserve to be honored".
I'll ask you again, if antebellum culture was so bad, why do blacks today almost exclusively prosper as a community in the deep south?
Alabama, seriously? Some of the most crushing poverty in the US is found among black people in Alabama. Poverty in Alabama is rampant, and disproportionately so among the black population.
I think it would be the top of arrogance for me to tell people that their holiday is artificial and based on pretense, but that's just me.
Even if I were to accept at face value the idea that there's some unique southern culture that propels the black population to prosperity (and I don't), that doesn't serve to excuse one iota of the crime that was slavery. Not does it change the fact that Lee embraced slavery and was a harsh slavemaster - not merely by our standards, but by the standards of 1860s Virginia. Although he did express the smarmy attitude that it was, ultimately, for the improvement of the slaves.
Alabama has high poverty for every race compared to a national level, that means nothing. Actually someone wrote about this in the 70s, the blacks there are suffering but had church service, it was toxic waste dumps and fast food that hurt them (mainly the former). It says nothing about the south in general.
Black people in the south are better spoken and have better families. Why do you think blacks have a 72% single parent household rate? It goes down with south Carolina, Georgia, etc.
Read Harper Lee, blacks in the south before the 60s were content with whites, but the NAACP came down and taught them to be unhappy which is what started the strife.
Lee surrendered, and he hoped to rebuild America, let the poor man rest in peace.
"I will bear true allegiance to the United States of America, and that I will serve them honestly and faithfully against all their enemies or opposers whatsoever"
And look at what he decided to do! And we defend him! Go figure!
This is what I see. We all know that based on the oath Lee swore, and Lee turning his back on that oath, he is a traitor. Normally, traitors get life imprisonment or the death penalty. Lee got off way to easy. I think some people were willing to overlook that he committed treason for a few reasons. One reason is racial animosity. After the South lost, there was alot of racial animus going on. Slavery was over, but Robert E. Lee, and other Confederate generals represented the Lost Cause, the Confederate cause. A cause that was rooted in keeping slavery. It was like an intellectual wing of the Jim Crow way of life.
Another thing to consider is vindication. There was alot of humiliation that came from losing the war. Putting up statues of Confederate generals was a way of salvaging selt-esteem.
"I will bear true allegiance to the United States of America, and that I will serve them honestly and faithfully against all their enemies or opposers whatsoever"
And look at what he decided to do! And we defend him! Go figure!
Quote:
Originally Posted by green_mariner
This is what I see. We all know that based on the oath Lee swore, and Lee turning his back on that oath, he is a traitor. Normally, traitors get life imprisonment or the death penalty. Lee got off way to easy. I think some people were willing to overlook that he committed treason for a few reasons. One reason is racial animosity. After the South lost, there was alot of racial animus going on. Slavery was over, but Robert E. Lee, and other Confederate generals represented the Lost Cause, the Confederate cause. A cause that was rooted in keeping slavery. It was like an intellectual wing of the Jim Crow way of life.
Another thing to consider is vindication. There was alot of humiliation that came from losing the war. Putting up statues of Confederate generals was a way of salvaging selt-esteem.
Centralized Government vs Decentralized Government
Free and Independent States vs States United under One Government
They saw the same corruption within their newly formed Government, that that they had seen before and the freeing themselves from Great Britain --- that's okay to do.
Free the States from the corruption within --- that's not okay to do?
Seems to me that alliance is sworn to the u.s. Constitution and they will fight the domestic interference with it as well as foreign. But we can't do that, can't fight the domestic interference, because that is treason --- good to know.
I'll ask you again, if antebellum culture was so bad, why do blacks today almost exclusively prosper as a community in the deep south?
It was a cornerstone of antebellum culture that black people were inferior and that slavery subordination to the superior race was their natural and normal condition. I think that qualifies as "bad". Do you disagree?
They saw the same corruption within their newly formed Government, that that they had seen before and the freeing themselves from Great Britain --- that's okay to do.
Tosh. They saw their right to treat human beings as property under threat. They admitted as much, in writing.
They saw the same corruption within their newly formed Government, that that they had seen before and the freeing themselves from Great Britain --- that's okay to do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA
Tosh. They saw their right to treat human beings as property under threat. They admitted as much, in writing.
They saw making decisions on their own without government oversight, something to fight for --- Did you know they still treat slaves as property, but they are property that the government can not collect taxes on. (property taxes and rights, that part might have made it out)
Read one article, the Bond slave --- same as then, work in the fields, same as then, work to pay for their release, same as then --- they are here in the u.s., same as then.
"Ending modern slavery by 2030 was one of the global goals adopted unanimously by members of the U.N. five years ago. But at today’s rate, achieving that goal is “impossible,” the report said. It would require freeing some 10,000 people each day for the next decade, it said."
Do you not think that what Robert E. Lee said, was honorable? Hint --- it is a whole other culture in a whole other era, that would serve us better is we did not judge them by our present day bias. There are not that many culturally literate people in the u.s., could be it isn't taught in the schools and one must seek it out in college if they care to learn.
If a person gave their word then, right or wrong --- they stood by it. There was no second guessing as to their motives as we have today --- because a person just knew exactly where everyone stood.
Jim Crow museum? And in the north what sort of museum would they have --- ?
Did you know that the North was heavy in discrimination practices and the organization, The Congress of Racial Equality (CORE), founded in 1942 was born up North to combat those practicing beyond their laws of the land? In the 1940s --- The first sit-in was conducted up North ... the protest didn't filter down into the South until 1961?
In the North the law is there, but then so are the people, not really willing to abide by those laws.
In the South you have a different law and then there were those people not really willing to abide by those laws either.
I agree to your compromise though --- the people in Ft Mill might disagree
You can not give freedom (of speech) to one, without giving freedom to all, it doesn't work that way and we had a huge massive civil war that proves it. Be careful the one you silence, isn't that of yourself as well.
Getting a little defensive are we? The northern states are not without their faults. However, that isn’t the topic of discussion here. So with all of this deflecting and sprinkling of red herring arguments....let’s just get to the point. Are you in favor of removal of confederate statues and monuments in public spaces such as in front of state capitols and courthouses or are you in favor of leaving them where they are?
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.
