Revisionist History-OT
Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition
RE: Revisionist History-OT
CR, I agree. It is disgusting that we are subject to a majority opinion that wants to maintain monuments to a treasonous secession movement which had as its genesis the perpetuation of slavery. Minority people, such as african americans, must live under the unblinking eyes of statues which were for the most part put up in the Jim Crow era as expression of the intolerance and hate you mention. The battle is lost... for the Lost Cause dead-enders.
- Canoerebel
- Posts: 21099
- Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
- Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
- Contact:
RE: Revisionist History-OT
ORIGINAL: Zorch
Cortisone cream is good for that. [:)]ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
I've talked and typed way too much today. Waaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyy too much. I've irritated myself.
Please, no more dangly-bit allusions.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
- Grfin Zeppelin
- Posts: 1514
- Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 2:22 pm
- Location: Germany
RE: Revisionist History-OT
Dont forget to burn the books.ORIGINAL: darbymcd
CR, I agree. It is disgusting that we are subject to a majority opinion that wants to maintain monuments to a treasonous secession movement which had as its genesis the perpetuation of slavery. Minority people, such as african americans, must live under the unblinking eyes of statues which were for the most part put up in the Jim Crow era as expression of the intolerance and hate you mention. The battle is lost... for the Lost Cause dead-enders.
RE: Revisionist History-OT
Oh, that has already begun. But that they do as silently as they can since here they fear public opinion.ORIGINAL: Gräfin Zeppelin
Dont forget to burn the books.
Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb -- they're often students, for heaven's sake. - Terry Pratchett
RE: Revisionist History-OT
warspite1ORIGINAL: darbymcd
CR, I agree. It is disgusting that we are subject to a majority opinion that wants to maintain monuments to a treasonous secession movement which had as its genesis the perpetuation of slavery. Minority people, such as african americans, must live under the unblinking eyes of statues which were for the most part put up in the Jim Crow era as expression of the intolerance and hate you mention. The battle is lost... for the Lost Cause dead-enders.
So I ask again, where does it end and who, on this faux moral crusade to re-write our past, actually decides? What do you do about slave owners like George Washington? Why are Lee, Nelson, Columbus proposed as fair game if Washington isn't? Have you read some of Washington's comments on his slaves? Just try and follow this nonsense down its logical path (as logical as this gets - which isn't very) and see where we end up.
Still it will create lots of employment - think of all those street names, buildings, warships that need re-naming. That'll keep the map makers busy - and boy will Wikipedia need a lot of new contributors.
Problems that remain in society don't get fixed by re-writing history. They get fixed by confronting the past, recognising the journey and striving to get where we want to be.
Now Maitland, now's your time!
Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
RE: Revisionist History-OT
Hi all,
Dear Lord... [:(]
Leo "Apollo11"
ORIGINAL: Panther Bait
Looks like you can add Christopher Columbus (mean to indigenous people) and Ulysses S. Grant (anti-Semite) to the list of "symbols of hate".
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/christopher-columbus-statue-new-york-city-could-be-considered-removal-n795316?cid=par-xfinity_20170823
Dear Lord... [:(]
Leo "Apollo11"
Prior Preparation & Planning Prevents Pathetically Poor Performance!
A & B: WitW, WitE, WbtS, GGWaW, GGWaW2-AWD, HttR, CotA, BftB, CF
P: UV, WitP, WitP-AE
RE: Revisionist History-OT
It's a false dilemma to say the US had to either invade Japan or nuke Japan. Japan would have surrendered if offered even semi-reasonable terms.
RE: Revisionist History-OT
What evidence is there for that? I just watched a documentary on the development and use of the atomic bomb which said that even after the second (Nagasaki) bomb the hardliners in the Japanese Cabinet wanted to fight to the death. They even wanted to defy the emperor's speech. There were just enough that wanted to obey the emperor to decide to surrender if the Allies would allow the emperor to remain head of state. Surrender was supposed to be unconditional but Truman accepted the emperor remaining condition and ended the war - the implication being that if he stuck to "unconditional surrender" the Japanese would have fought on. Even without the A-bomb air raids were devastating Japanese cities and killing tens of thousands. I don't see "ready to capitulate" as a sure thing without the bomb.ORIGINAL: Amoral
It's a false dilemma to say the US had to either invade Japan or nuke Japan. Japan would have surrendered if offered even semi-reasonable terms.
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
RE: Revisionist History-OT
I hope there are no statues or monuments or public buildings dedicated to the memory of Oppenheimer, Truman etc.... [8|]
Now Maitland, now's your time!
Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
- Panther Bait
- Posts: 654
- Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2006 8:59 pm
RE: Revisionist History-OT
ORIGINAL: warspite1
warspite1ORIGINAL: darbymcd
CR, I agree. It is disgusting that we are subject to a majority opinion that wants to maintain monuments to a treasonous secession movement which had as its genesis the perpetuation of slavery. Minority people, such as african americans, must live under the unblinking eyes of statues which were for the most part put up in the Jim Crow era as expression of the intolerance and hate you mention. The battle is lost... for the Lost Cause dead-enders.
So I ask again, where does it end and who, on this moral crusade to re-write our past, actually decides? What do you do about slave owners like George Washington? Why are Lee, Nelson, Columbus proposed as fair game if Washington isn't? Have you read some of Washington's comments on his slaves? Just try and follow this nonsense down its logical path (as logical as this gets - which isn't very) and see where we end up.
Still it will create lots of employment - think of all those street names, buildings, warships that need re-naming. That'll keep the map makers busy - and boy will Wikipedia need a lot of new contributors.
Problems that remain in society don't get fixed by re-writing history. They get fixed by confronting the past, recognising the journey and striving to get where we want to be.
Considering the capital of the country they "govern" is named after Washington, imagine the consequences. Maybe they can rename it Freedom Fries, D.C. That seemed to work well before.
Mike
When you shoot at a destroyer and miss, it's like hit'in a wildcat in the ass with a banjo.
Nathan Dogan, USS Gurnard
Nathan Dogan, USS Gurnard
RE: Revisionist History-OT
I, personally, think it's absolutely ridiculous to have statues of men that tried to destroy our nation, on "gov't" property.
I don't care if Robert E. Lee was for or against slavery, I don't care if he was a good man or a bad man by todays or 1860s standard of judgement. In my opinion, the man was a traitor, nothing more nothing less. As as a result, not one single gov't penny or parcel of gov't land should should have his (or any other Confederate leader) image, likeness, bust, statue etc. on it... unless it's in a museum or a history book.
I don't care if Robert E. Lee was for or against slavery, I don't care if he was a good man or a bad man by todays or 1860s standard of judgement. In my opinion, the man was a traitor, nothing more nothing less. As as a result, not one single gov't penny or parcel of gov't land should should have his (or any other Confederate leader) image, likeness, bust, statue etc. on it... unless it's in a museum or a history book.
RE: Revisionist History-OT
ORIGINAL: darbymcd
CR, I agree. It is disgusting that we are subject to a majority opinion that wants to maintain monuments to a treasonous secession movement which had as its genesis the perpetuation of slavery. Minority people, such as african americans, must live under the unblinking eyes of statues which were for the most part put up in the Jim Crow era as expression of the intolerance and hate you mention. The battle is lost... for the Lost Cause dead-enders.
[&o]
- Bullwinkle58
- Posts: 11297
- Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:47 pm
RE: Revisionist History-OT
ORIGINAL: AcePylut
I, personally, think it's absolutely ridiculous to have statues of men that tried to destroy our nation, on "gov't" property.
I don't care if Robert E. Lee was for or against slavery, I don't care if he was a good man or a bad man by todays or 1860s standard of judgement. In my opinion, the man was a traitor, nothing more nothing less. As as a result, not one single gov't penny or parcel of gov't land should should have his (or any other Confederate leader) image, likeness, bust, statue etc. on it... unless it's in a museum or a history book.
This is the crux, that all the "Washington, Jefferson . . ." apologists miss. The Confederacy was a traitorous enterprise. It was never a nation (see USSC decision.) The officers of the CSA, especially Lee, were traitors by the plain wording of the US Constitution. Put the statues in museums, with plaques explaining they were traitors. Get them off public streets and out of public parks.
The Moose
- Grfin Zeppelin
- Posts: 1514
- Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 2:22 pm
- Location: Germany
RE: Revisionist History-OT
For the sake of forum peace just drop this topic. Nothing good will come out of it.
RE: Revisionist History-OT
We should not hide reality. Some (not all - some) who want to remove or change various icons are very bigoted in various ways but seem to pushing for some sort of false purity, almost as though it justifies their own bigotry. What will come of doing so is worse bigotry and extremism as reasoned perspectives are replaced by emotional lynch-mobbing. I will shut up now. [8D]
Condoleezza Rice on Slave Owner Statue Purge: ‘It’s a Bad Thing’
“I’m a firm believer in keep your history before you,” Rice answered. “And so, I don’t actually want to rename things that were named for slave owners. I want us to have to look at these names and recognize that they did.”
http://www.thewrap.com/condoleezza-rice-denounces-tearing-down-slave-owners-monuments-its-a-bad-thing/
Condoleezza Rice on Slave Owner Statue Purge: ‘It’s a Bad Thing’
“I’m a firm believer in keep your history before you,” Rice answered. “And so, I don’t actually want to rename things that were named for slave owners. I want us to have to look at these names and recognize that they did.”
http://www.thewrap.com/condoleezza-rice-denounces-tearing-down-slave-owners-monuments-its-a-bad-thing/
Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/view/staffmonkeys/home
- Canoerebel
- Posts: 21099
- Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
- Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
- Contact:
RE: Revisionist History-OT
If we applied scripture, we would by acclamation take down the monuments, recognizing that they are "stumbling blocks" to a meaningful percentage of our population.
But that wouldn't be a solution. There will be no satisfying the grievance movement until everything is torn down and there is a new form of government rooted in something - mob rule, pure democracy, anarchy, libertarianism, or something. And eventually, like all forms of government (democracy, republic, socialist, communist, fascist), wealth and power will accrue to a small percentage smart enough, strong-willed enough, selfish enough, or lucky enough to thrive. And the process would be repeated.
America, warts and all, has the freedom of movement to go up or down, depending on hard work, smarts, athleticism, luck, good looks, whatever. We are not bound hard by chains in our social class. We have been a mobile nation...and that trend has increased over time, as minorities have become more and more part of the mainstream classes and wealth classes. We have lots of warts, but I prefer imperfect freedom to imperfect totalitarianism or imperfect mob rule.
We would do well to emulate Lincoln's "with malice towards none, with charity for all" sentiment. But that's not where we're heading.
But that wouldn't be a solution. There will be no satisfying the grievance movement until everything is torn down and there is a new form of government rooted in something - mob rule, pure democracy, anarchy, libertarianism, or something. And eventually, like all forms of government (democracy, republic, socialist, communist, fascist), wealth and power will accrue to a small percentage smart enough, strong-willed enough, selfish enough, or lucky enough to thrive. And the process would be repeated.
America, warts and all, has the freedom of movement to go up or down, depending on hard work, smarts, athleticism, luck, good looks, whatever. We are not bound hard by chains in our social class. We have been a mobile nation...and that trend has increased over time, as minorities have become more and more part of the mainstream classes and wealth classes. We have lots of warts, but I prefer imperfect freedom to imperfect totalitarianism or imperfect mob rule.
We would do well to emulate Lincoln's "with malice towards none, with charity for all" sentiment. But that's not where we're heading.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
RE: Revisionist History-OT
This is gonna get locked, folks. Move along.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it!
RE: Revisionist History-OT
ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
ORIGINAL: AcePylut
I, personally, think it's absolutely ridiculous to have statues of men that tried to destroy our nation, on "gov't" property.
I don't care if Robert E. Lee was for or against slavery, I don't care if he was a good man or a bad man by todays or 1860s standard of judgement. In my opinion, the man was a traitor, nothing more nothing less. As as a result, not one single gov't penny or parcel of gov't land should should have his (or any other Confederate leader) image, likeness, bust, statue etc. on it... unless it's in a museum or a history book.
This is the crux, that all the "Washington, Jefferson . . ." apologists miss. The Confederacy was a traitorous enterprise. It was never a nation (see USSC decision.) The officers of the CSA, especially Lee, were traitors by the plain wording of the US Constitution. Put the statues in museums, with plaques explaining they were traitors. Get them off public streets and out of public parks.
Yes, but the American Revolution was a traitorous enterprise.
Famous people get the monuments.
Almost every single individual that has ever had a monument erected to him or her
Is a Son of a Bitch in one area or another. It is almost an historical requirement because
Famous people are often complex like that.
The problem is where does it end? What is the next step? I’m a southerner and I don’t have a dog in this fight. I don’t care if the monuments stay or go but what about me?
My ancestors fought for the south. In your book they were all traitors. When the war was over they returned to their homes and farms and had children. In your book they were they still traitors even after they took the oath of allegiance. I’m a direct descendent of those people. I have their DNA in my body and bloodstream.
You could say without reservation that I’m a living monument to those traitors and slave owners.
There are direct descendents of Jefferson and Lee living in our country.
There are black people living in America that have Thomas Jefferson’s DNA in them.
What are you going to do with us living monuments?
Maybe we will have to wear an armband. Instead of the Star of David maybe a small Confederate flag
On the armband to signify we have at least one drop of slave owner blood in our systems.
"A man's got to know his limitations" -Dirty Harry
RE: Revisionist History-OT
ORIGINAL: Lecivius
This is gonna get locked, folks. Move along.
Yes it will. It shouldn't but it will. And it's not Matrix's fault. They've been willing to bend over backwards in an attempt to be fair and open and kind and tolerant. But , in the long run , they are a commercial enterprise and controversy just doesn't pay the bills.
"It ought to be a law!". "We should do SOMETHING about that!". "Why hasn't anyone stopped that?". In my mind, these are the culprits to much of our societies failings.
Let me explain. We are a society of well meaning people. We try to cure every illness, right every wrong , solve every problem. And we are arrogant to think we can. We have full time state legislatures, full time politicians in every capacity no matter how small the community, we complain when congress takes a week off (when our ancestors were worries when they met too much) and a legal system to tries to right every imaginable wrong (and quite a few unimaginable ones too!).
We are busy bodies , micro managers and individuals with a God complex.
Why? Previous generations looked at "problems" and asked are they really problems? Should we interfere? Is it any of societies concerns or that of individuals? Should we just butt out? But today everyone needs to have a grievance , has to be a victim, or some how they feel incomplete. Disputes that in the past we worked out by two individuals behind a barn, now require a bloated judicial system. Why? And how did we get to everyone has a immediate need to be addressed , but people who have a different view to ours cannot have their say , in the name of "Social justice?". Isn't ANY justice by our vary system "Social?" In every legal jurisdiction does not a criminal trial issue a case of "the people against ...."? Or the state of , or the US Government (you know , of "We the people" fame) against...."?
Maybe THAT's the main song of the recent Disney musical Frozen resonated so strongly with people. "Let it go" is good advice. Don't have an opinion on everything , especially things that don't concern you. And of course that old bit of advice on government (often attributed to Jefferson , but could be anybody) "the government that governs least, governs best". My personal favorite adage is "just because you CAN do something , doesn't mean you should". Or maybe all these government incursions into life is just the political equivalent of "hold my beer". [X(][:(][:'(][:D]
RE: Revisionist History-OT
warspite1ORIGINAL: Trugrit
ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
ORIGINAL: AcePylut
I, personally, think it's absolutely ridiculous to have statues of men that tried to destroy our nation, on "gov't" property.
I don't care if Robert E. Lee was for or against slavery, I don't care if he was a good man or a bad man by todays or 1860s standard of judgement. In my opinion, the man was a traitor, nothing more nothing less. As as a result, not one single gov't penny or parcel of gov't land should should have his (or any other Confederate leader) image, likeness, bust, statue etc. on it... unless it's in a museum or a history book.
This is the crux, that all the "Washington, Jefferson . . ." apologists miss. The Confederacy was a traitorous enterprise. It was never a nation (see USSC decision.) The officers of the CSA, especially Lee, were traitors by the plain wording of the US Constitution. Put the statues in museums, with plaques explaining they were traitors. Get them off public streets and out of public parks.
Yes, but the American Revolution was a traitorous enterprise.
Well said. I can't believe how many "tear down the monuments apologists" simply miss this fundamental point. Depending on whose 'side' you sit, someone is going to be a bad guy to someone. So for example, depending on whose side you sit, one of Charles I or Oliver Cromwell was a traitor. The 1640's were a massively important time in British history. There are monuments, there are memorials to both. That time needs to be remembered. So does the US Civil War.
Condoleezza Rice - you put it perfectly.
Now Maitland, now's your time!
Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815