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.
Even then, I'm still sort of surprised they even have a statue of George Washington in London. Just the same, I agree that there is a difference between why the USA was founded vs why the Confederacy was founded. Alexander H. Stephens himself said chattel slavery and the African race being subjugated/inferior was the cornerstone of why the Confederacy was being established.
They brought over dirt from the US so he wouldn't stand on English soil... I think it's easy to underestimate just how huge of an influence the Enlightenment had on pretty much everything. And that Washington, when given the chance - and he had it - didn't seize power, but handed it off to Congress, that solidified him as a great man in the minds of many.
There's a slight difference between founding a new nation based on the idea of self-determination vs. founding a new nation based on the idea of upholding chattel slavery. The Brits, not being dumb, can tell one from the other.
well everyone had slaves during Washington's time on both sides of the line.
They didn't need to fight for the right to own slaves. It was never questioned!
well everyone had slaves during Washington's time on both sides of the line.
They didn't need to fight for the right to own slaves. It was never questioned!
The institution that Jefferson called a "hideous blot" and "moral depravity" was never questioned?
One republic was founded as an attempt - imperfect and loaded with compromise - at establishing a form of government based on consent of the governed. Slavery was tolerated because the republic wouldn't have gotten off the ground, otherwise.
Fast forward 80 years or so. The prevailing attitude towards slavery has shifted. Now, a splinter faction of states form their own confederacy for the distinct purpose of conserving chattel slavery.
I have no problem holding one up over the other. YMMV.
The institution that Jefferson called a "hideous blot" and "moral depravity" was never questioned?
One republic was founded as an attempt - imperfect and loaded with compromise - at establishing a form of government based on consent of the governed. Slavery was tolerated because the republic wouldn't have gotten off the ground, otherwise.
Fast forward 80 years or so. The prevailing attitude towards slavery has shifted. Now, a splinter faction of states form their own confederacy for the distinct purpose of conserving chattel slavery.
I have no problem holding one up over the other. YMMV.
It was never questioned by England, therefore the colonists never had to "Fight" for it.
Gotcha. you have no problem "holding up" Washington and Jefferson, who owned literally hundreds or thousands of slaves and would have fought on the Confederacy if slavery weren't accepted by large consensus in their day, but you denigrate Robert E. Lee who never really even owned many at all, and freed some of the ones he inherited.
His allegiance was to the South and their cause for the war was states' rights to do what they wish. He was a Virginian...did you think he was going to fight for the Union? He was also probably the greatest American general alive at the time. Of course the South was going to ask him to lead their cause and of course many people with national pride (in a time when slavery was accepted and commonplace for hundreds of years) would have a very hard time turning down a request like that from your follow statesmen.
Quite inconsistent of you. Why not take that big moral stand in 2021 and condemn ALL slave owners throughout history? Why not at least be consistent? Or are you finally admitting that it's more complicated and nuanced than that?
It was never questioned by England, therefore the colonists never had to "Fight" for it.
Gotcha. you have no problem "holding up" Washington and Jefferson, who owned literally hundreds or thousands of slaves and would have fought on the Confederacy if slavery weren't accepted by large consensus in their day, but you denigrate Robert E. Lee who never really even owned many at all, and freed some of the ones he inherited.
His allegiance was to the South and their cause for the war was states' rights to do what they wish. He was a Virginian...did you think he was going to fight for the Union? He was also probably the greatest American general alive at the time. Of course the South was going to ask him to lead their cause and of course many people with national pride (in a time when slavery was accepted and commonplace for hundreds of years) would have a very hard time turning down a request like that from your follow statesmen.
Quite inconsistent of you. Why not take that big moral stand in 2021 and condemn ALL slave owners throughout history? Why not at least be consistent? Or are you finally admitting that it's more complicated and nuanced than that?
Confederacy hating hypocrites don’t have a problem with non-confederate slave owners. Their monuments can stay.
Even then, I'm still sort of surprised they even have a statue of George Washington in London. Just the same, I agree that there is a difference between why the USA was founded vs why the Confederacy was founded. Alexander H. Stephens himself said chattel slavery and the African race being subjugated/inferior was the cornerstone of why the Confederacy was being established.
This piece sortof explains why:
Quote:
The statue was presented to the British as a gift in 1921, when relations between the United States and the United Kingdom were much, much better than they had been in 1783. It's an exact replica of an original statue commissioned by Thomas Jefferson, which can still be seen in the Virginia State Capitol building in Richmond.
... Because legend has it that George Washington once swore he would never set foot on British soil ever again, the erectors of the Trafalgar Square statue laid it on a foundation of Virginia soil to ensure that Washington did not tell a lie.
But the idea that the commander in chief of the Continental Army is somehow unwelcome in London is the real fiction. Washington was actually well-respected by the British people -- and by one very important British person in particular.
Why George Washington's Statue in London Doesn't Touch British Soil
It’s bizarre that there were ever confederate statues in the capitol. It’d be like having a statue of King George in the capitol.
Reality often is really stranger than fiction:
Pulling Down the Statue of George III
Quote:
On July 9, 1776, the Declaration of Independence was read for the first time in New York in front of George Washington and his troops. In reaction to what had been read, soldiers and citizens went to Bowling Green, a park in Manhattan, where a lead statue of King George III on horseback stood. The mob of people pulled down the statue, and later the lead was melted down to make musket balls, or bullets for use in the war for independence. (3) Careful records were kept, and it is known that 42, 088 bullets were made. (4)
This engraving, and the painting that it is based upon, show a very romanticized version of the event. According to the eye witness accounts, the mob included soldiers, sailors, blacks, and a few lower class citizens, not the women, children, and Native Americans pictured here. Also, the artist portrays King George’s statue incorrectly. The statue in the image is wearing eighteenth century clothing and a crown. (5) No image exists of the actual statue, but descriptions of it mention that it was sculpted wearing a Roman toga. All that is left of the statue are a few fragments that broke off when it fell to the ground. The statue only stood erect in Bowling Green for six years, as it was originally commissioned to celebrate the repeal of the Stamp Act in 1766. (6)
This incident was symbolic because it showed that Americans were ready to be independent and free from tyrannical rule, but also by pulling down a statue of the King, it was a symbolic gesture to make historic change from the rule of a monarchy to the rule of a democracy. (7)
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.
