Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Coog kev

Confederate Things Torn Down

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, RamSack said:

I wonder if Washington or Jefferson every whipped or watched one of their slaves get whipped?

I'll ask again.  Do you believe that Washington and Jefferson were traitors to our country.  This entire discussion is based on whether or not confederate monuments celebrate traitors to our Union and you derailed the discussion with talk of Washington and Jefferson.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, RamSack said:

I’m not missing the point. I posted this in another response, but it fits here to:

 

I’m just arguing to understand all points. I think it’s hypocritical to say that a Robert E Lee statue has to come down yet we are fine leaving Thomas Jefferson’s up. Robert E Lee left the Union because his home state seceded, not because he wanted to fight to protect the institution of slavery. Thomas Jefferson did the same basic thing. He was just on the winning side. The fact is that he still owned slaves.

Their owning slaves is something we can and should condemn.  However there is a difference between the founding generation and the Confederacy.  The Confederacy rebelled for the purpose of maintaining ownership.  Jefferson for example has writings condemning slave ownership as a depravity and blight.and made legislative attempts to end slavery, even though he hypocritically maintained ownership of slaves until death.  The founding documents of the Confederacy however states directly that ownership of black people is "natural".

So while we can acknowledge our founders played a role in the original sins of our country, context is key.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, PokeTransplant said:

I'll ask again.  Do you believe that Washington and Jefferson were traitors to our country.  This entire discussion is based on whether or not confederate monuments celebrate traitors to our Union and you derailed the discussion with talk of Washington and Jefferson.

I do not think it is a bad tangent, and a good exercise to discuss.  See my above post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, PokeTransplant said:

I'll ask again.  Do you believe that Washington and Jefferson were traitors to our country.  This entire discussion is based on whether or not confederate monuments celebrate traitors to our Union and you derailed the discussion with talk of Washington and Jefferson.

It does? Sorry, but I don’t see anything in the OP that talks about traitors. It does mention something about an “awful time in America’s history” though which I equate to the BLM issues. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Headbutt said:

I don't know what BB is, but I've heard that story before.  That the confederate battle flag wasn't really the official flag of the confederacy.  That flying it isn't a celebration of the confederacy but rather a celebration of independence (a notion that I'd like if I thought for a minute that it was factual), and so on and so forth.  All revisionist BS.

As far as the south committing treason?  Welllll....they didn't try to overthrow the government, they tried to secede from it.  I wouldn't call that treason.  They were in the wrong, no question.  I don't believe that most southerners were actually in favor of secession either, but rather just opposed to losing certain rights and opportunities that were going to go away if they had to follow the countries leadership.  Mostly the right to own slaves.  They saw that (and were correct) as a huge economic blow.  From the confederate point of view they were going to set up their own country or make the north adopt their standards.  Not traitorous, but definitely radical enough to incite a war.

Barkboard is the main Fresno site.   I don’t visit the politics board there much which might be a good thing.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Confederate Things Torn Down" screams of discussions about the sins of Washington and Jefferson.

deflection

 noun

de·flec·tion | \ di-ˈflek-shən  , dē- \

Definition of deflection

1: a turning aside or off course : DEVIATION
2: the departure of an indicator or pointer from the zero reading on the scale of an instrument
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Provocative and clever. 

Also, as a Native American I would like to get your opinion on something another Native friend of mine said.  He is of the opinion that while the Union is ultimately on the right side of History, the Confederacy winning would have been better for Native populations and Mexicans and even offered them permanent seats in congress. @youngrebelfan40 I would like your opinion on this as well as I am sure it is something you have way more knowledge than I do on and, being a white boy who never looked at this as well read as I am, it seemed out of place for me to argue.

The success of the union was clearly very bad for the native americans. Dunno if a southern victory would have been better for the Indians, as that region wasn't exactly friendly to them. But I think there's an argument that Native groups had significantly more agency and power when multiple powers were vying for supremacy, and a win by the south would have at least resulted in a kind of imbalance that would have been advantageous for at least some native groups. A total union victory resulting in a coast-to-coast, United States was a total disaster for Native Americans. 

Planning is an exercise of power, and in a modern state much real power is suffused with boredom. The agents of planning are usually boring; the planning process is boring; the implementation of plans is always boring. In a democracy boredom works for bureaucracies and corporations as smell works for skunk. It keeps danger away. Power does not have to be exercised behind the scenes. It can be open. The audience is asleep. The modern world is forged amidst our inattention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, smltwnrckr said:

The success of the union was clearly very bad for the native americans. Dunno if a southern victory would have been better for the Indians, as that region wasn't exactly friendly to them. But I think there's an argument that Native groups had significantly more agency and power when multiple powers were vying for supremacy, and a win by the south would have at least resulted in a kind of imbalance that would have been advantageous for at least some native groups. A total union victory resulting in a coast-to-coast, United States was a total disaster for Native Americans. 

That is almost the exact argument made to me.  That with a Confederate victory Native populations would have had increased agency in both the Union and the Confederacy, with a bidding war going to the highest bidder including land, congressional representation and even autonomy.  Two powers vying for control of the still unconquered West.  The argument was also made that Mexico would have at some point joined the Confederacy in some way, shape or form leading to a better life today for Latin Americans.

A good mental exercise to think about. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

That is almost the exact argument made to me.  That with a Confederate victory Native populations would have had increased agency in both the Union and the Confederacy, with a bidding war going to the highest bidder including land, congressional representation and even autonomy.  Two powers vying for control of the still unconquered West.  The argument was also made that that Mexico would have at some point joined the Confederacy in some way, shape or form leading to a better life today for Latin Americans.

A good mental exercise to think about. 

The last one isn't clear to me - from what I understand, Mexico was pretty anti-slavery by the 1860s. But honestly, Mexico-Confederacy relationships is not something I know a lot about. So don't take my word for it. 

Planning is an exercise of power, and in a modern state much real power is suffused with boredom. The agents of planning are usually boring; the planning process is boring; the implementation of plans is always boring. In a democracy boredom works for bureaucracies and corporations as smell works for skunk. It keeps danger away. Power does not have to be exercised behind the scenes. It can be open. The audience is asleep. The modern world is forged amidst our inattention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, smltwnrckr said:

The last one isn't clear to me - from what I understand, Mexico was pretty anti-slavery by the 1860s. But honestly, Mexico-Confederacy relationships is not something I know a lot about. So don't take my word for it. 

This is a long conversation we had, and at a certain point I decided it was best I remove myself from it because who am I to say what would have been best for the Native population?  Hence while I have appealed to authority in this thread so when we inevitably have the conversation again, I can be better equipped.  He expressed the idea that the war only expedited the abolition of slavery by a decade or two and if the Confederacy had won, they would have faced pressure as an export country to end slavery.  He argued that the ultimate result for African populations would have been the same, just delayed a decade or two.  Seems a huge leap, to me or at least it does it would have been the same in just a decade or two.

@youngrebelfan40 please chime in on this subject if you have the time, your time is something I value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

This is a long conversation we had, and at a certain point I decided it was best I remove myself from it because who am I to say what would have been best for the Native population?  Hence while I have appealed to authority in this thread so when we inevitably have the conversation again, I can be better equipped.  He expressed the idea that the war only expedited the abolition of slavery by a decade or two and if the Confederacy had won, they would have faced pressure as an export country to end slavery.  He argued that the ultimate result for African populations would have been the same, just delayed a decade or two.  Seems a huge leap, to me or at least it does it would have been the same in just a decade or two.

@youngrebelfan40 please chime in on this subject if you have the time, your time is something I value.

At the end of the day, counterfactuals are for conversations over beer. Because no one can ever really know. 

Planning is an exercise of power, and in a modern state much real power is suffused with boredom. The agents of planning are usually boring; the planning process is boring; the implementation of plans is always boring. In a democracy boredom works for bureaucracies and corporations as smell works for skunk. It keeps danger away. Power does not have to be exercised behind the scenes. It can be open. The audience is asleep. The modern world is forged amidst our inattention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Was it you or a different CSU fan with Ram in their moniker that blamed the Jews for the wars in Europe and then the Middle East?

@thelawlorfaithful do you remember who that was?

tenor.gif?itemid=5304022

We’re all sitting in the dugout. Thinking we should pitch. How you gonna throw a shutout when all you do is bitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Headbutt said:

I think we see it almost the same.  We both see the confederacy in the same light.  You see monuments as shrines, I see them as markers.  A record of our journey as a country.  I don't buy the argument that we have books and stuff.  That stuff is malleable, it can be rewritten or eliminated altogether.  Monuments create discussion and research.  They tell a story that we can't ever afford to forget.  I don't think we can afford to try and erase physical reminders of the darkest days of this country.  They may be repulsive or at least uncomfortable, but hiding them is disingenuous.  That shit happened.  I think it's wrong to remove history, even ugly history.  That's the thing we need to keep from repeating it.

Do they have "markers" to celebrate the culture of Sadaam Hussein in Iraq in their public squares?  Are there random swastikas sitting in parks in Germany that simply couldn't be removed because of the historical value?

Posted Image
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, retrofade said:

We have some sane ones of various political persuasions, and then we have others who say my political beliefs are further left than Karl Marx. 

Well, maybe it is time to change your avatar then.  We could use Marx to go along with Lenin LOL

Posted Image
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, RamSack said:

George Washington and Thomas Jefferson owned slaves. Should we rename all schools, streets, and buildings named after them? Should we remove their faces from Mount Rushmore?

I am guessing they wouldn't have statues if they lost the war.    When you are a two time loser of being a slaver and a traitor who lost he war you don't get to put up statues.  The biggest mistake we made was allow the south to romanticize evil and reinvent history for 200 years.  The union should have ground them to dust and imposed decency on them just like we did to the Nazis and the Japanese.

Posted Image
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Their owning slaves is something we can and should condemn.  However there is a difference between the founding generation and the Confederacy.  The Confederacy rebelled for the purpose of maintaining ownership.  Jefferson for example has writings condemning slave ownership as a depravity and blight.and made legislative attempts to end slavery, even though he hypocritically maintained ownership of slaves until death.  The founding documents of the Confederacy however states directly that ownership of black people is "natural".

So while we can acknowledge our founders played a role in the original sins of our country, context is key.  

What?  Context is key?  These are the same people who tried to make Joe Biden's single accusation that has fizzled out of sexual assault equivalent to Donald Trumps dozens and dozens of accusations.  Now they will try to make George Washington and traitors whose sole purpose was to tear apart the USA in the name of preserving slavery and LOST equivalent.  

Posted Image
Link to comment
Share on other sites

George Washington does not get statues built because he owned slaves,  he gets statues built because he helped lead a revolution. 

 

You can honor people with checkered pasts if you're honoring a good thing they did.

 

Confederate monuments honor the shitty things people did. Confederate generals would have statues if they weren't Confederate Generals. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Headbutt said:

I think we see it almost the same.  We both see the confederacy in the same light.  You see monuments as shrines, I see them as markers.  A record of our journey as a country.  I don't buy the argument that we have books and stuff.  That stuff is malleable, it can be rewritten or eliminated altogether.  Monuments create discussion and research.  They tell a story that we can't ever afford to forget.  I don't think we can afford to try and erase physical reminders of the darkest days of this country.  They may be repulsive or at least uncomfortable, but hiding them is disingenuous.  That shit happened.  I think it's wrong to remove history, even ugly history.  That's the thing we need to keep from repeating it.

I see what your trying to say, but you're way off target. What you're saying sounds similar to Germany keeping old Nazi statues and monuments to create discussion.  There are still tons of records and laws in place to make sure we don't forget either history, but the physical representation of Hitler saluting doesn't need to be there. Neither does a Confederate statue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...