|
| Posted By |
Message |
| Pages: 1 2 [3] |
RainyDay
LIF Adult
Member since 6/15 3990 total posts
Name:
|
Re: History
Posted by Palebride
A few thoughts:
History is taught in schools. History is taught in museums. Taking down Confederate monuments will not cause history to be forgotten....but it will show all of those victimized by slavery that they matter.
Traitors should not be memorialized. They should be remembered, but not honored.
The majority of the Confederate statues were put up quickly and cheaply and they're not even worth keeping anyway....did you see how easily that one was torn down and how it crumpled? Why keep that?
Germany does not honor the Nazis or Hitler....they honor the victims of those people. They know their country has an horrific past, so they work really hard to make sure that the evil that was done by them is not forgotten....but it is also not glorified. We could learn a thing of two from them!
|
Posted 8/20/17 4:05 PM  |
| |
|
Jenhos
Maeve
Member since 6/05 3273 total posts
Name:
|
Re: History
Posted by RainyDay
Posted by Palebride
A few thoughts:
History is taught in schools. History is taught in museums. Taking down Confederate monuments will not cause history to be forgotten....but it will show all of those victimized by slavery that they matter.
Traitors should not be memorialized. They should be remembered, but not honored.
The majority of the Confederate statues were put up quickly and cheaply and they're not even worth keeping anyway....did you see how easily that one was torn down and how it crumpled? Why keep that?
Germany does not honor the Nazis or Hitler....they honor the victims of those people. They know their country has an horrific past, so they work really hard to make sure that the evil that was done by them is not forgotten....but it is also not glorified. We could learn a thing of two from them!
I don't disagree but why stop at Confederate statues. We celebrate presidents that owned that slaves (regardless if it was legal at the time)
|
| Posted 8/20/17 5:26 PM |
| |
|
stinger
LIF Adult
Member since 11/11 4971 total posts
Name:
|
Re: History
Posted by Jenhos
Posted by RainyDay
Posted by Palebride
A few thoughts:
History is taught in schools. History is taught in museums. Taking down Confederate monuments will not cause history to be forgotten....but it will show all of those victimized by slavery that they matter.
Traitors should not be memorialized. They should be remembered, but not honored.
The majority of the Confederate statues were put up quickly and cheaply and they're not even worth keeping anyway....did you see how easily that one was torn down and how it crumpled? Why keep that?
Germany does not honor the Nazis or Hitler....they honor the victims of those people. They know their country has an horrific past, so they work really hard to make sure that the evil that was done by them is not forgotten....but it is also not glorified. We could learn a thing of two from them!
I don't disagree but why stop at Confederate statues. We celebrate presidents that owned that slaves (regardless if it was legal at the time)
Here is one explanation by historians
|
| Posted 8/20/17 5:58 PM |
| |
|
smdl
I love Gary too..on a plate!
Member since 5/06 32461 total posts
Name:
me
|
Re: History
Posted by Jenhos
Posted by smdl
Posted by Jenhos
Posted by smdl
Let's be honest, most of those monuments and statues were not from the time of the actual person or even close to their death. Many, decades later. They belong in museums or memorials. Like other artifacts within a context. I find the confederate flag offensive. There is a difference between keeping one's heritage and wishful thinking of living in a era that no longer exist over 150 YEARS. I lived in the South. They know exactly what this flag is. What it stands for. They still call people Yankees. Some still wish slaves existed. Let's not get naive. Many have not moved on. And this is why those statues and flag are fought for.
I don't disagree with this but how and where do you draw the line? We are already seeing a call for other thi ngs to be removed or changed. What are your thoughts on the few I listed above?
Not everyone will ever be happy. But not a display of a period of slavery and oppression in people's face. General Lee fought for the South to keep their way of live and slavery. This is different.
They won't all be happy but where do you draw the line? Hard to say that one thing is more offensive than another.
This is going to get worse before it gets better.
We draw the line when people start dying like in Charlottesville.
|
| Posted 8/20/17 6:34 PM |
| |
|
Palebride
I am an amazing bakist
Member since 5/05 13673 total posts
Name:
Lori
|
Re: History
Posted by Jenhos
Posted by RainyDay
Posted by Palebride
A few thoughts:
History is taught in schools. History is taught in museums. Taking down Confederate monuments will not cause history to be forgotten....but it will show all of those victimized by slavery that they matter.
Traitors should not be memorialized. They should be remembered, but not honored.
The majority of the Confederate statues were put up quickly and cheaply and they're not even worth keeping anyway....did you see how easily that one was torn down and how it crumpled? Why keep that?
Germany does not honor the Nazis or Hitler....they honor the victims of those people. They know their country has an horrific past, so they work really hard to make sure that the evil that was done by them is not forgotten....but it is also not glorified. We could learn a thing of two from them!
I don't disagree but why stop at Confederate statues. We celebrate presidents that owned that slaves (regardless if it was legal at the time)
We celebrate them for being the President of the United States...not for being slave owners.
The statues that people are arguing should be taken down are statues of people when they were in the Confederate Army, fighting against the United States, fighting to keep people as slaves. THAT is what they're being honored for in those statues, and it's disrespectful to Americans to keep them where they are.
|
| Posted 8/20/17 6:59 PM |
| |
|
|
|
History
I have some thoughts on this and am very much on the fence...
1-I feel like in our current climate, everything is offensive..I feel we cannot wash away what's happened, right or wrong-we have to remember
2-I've been listening to an interesting podcast called Revisionist History and he did one about a terrorist who turned spy and helped the US a lot-then they had a change in policy, exposed him, and he was killed-now...he was WRONG, but then did something so right...what do we do? Do we throw the baby out with the bathwater? Maybe not a memorial, but... don't know...
3. George Washington was no saint...many influential leaders have two or more sides to them..I think this simplifies things a little too much
4. Would we be having this discussion with a different president (anyone different)?
I am far from conservative, more in the center, and everything just seems so extreme lately..
|
| Posted 8/20/17 7:03 PM |
| |
|
Diane
Hope is Contagious....catch it
Member since 5/05 30683 total posts
Name:
D
|
Re: History
Someone wrote this on Facebook and happen to agree
Just like California trying to decide with the popular vote and dictate the rest of the country, the North wanted to control the south.
This is not mine, but is extremely informative.
When you state that Confederates were somehow traitors to their country or that the war was fought over the "right to own other people", it reveals a definite lack of understanding about American history in general and about the War Between the States specifically. We use the word "state" now to reference places like New Jersey or Texas or Virginia but when this country was new and young, people all around the world used the word "state" interchangeably and synonymous with the word "country" or "nation". Effectively, we were the United Countries of America. Each country/state was self governing and sovereign and each with an equal footing in the union of states. However, just as in the 2016 election when the heavily populated cities thought they should be allowed to rule the breadbasket of the nation, the northern states back then thought they should be able to impose their will and control the economy of the southern states because you know... majorities will be mobs and mobs will be mob-like. The self governing and sovereign southern states correctly said, "No, that is not how the United States was set up or how it was meant to be." Despite the erroneous and widely used misnomer, it was not a civil war; the Confederacy had no desire to overthrow any government or bring about the collapse of the Union. It was a War for Succession. The Confederacy of States only wanted to go its own separate way, be its own separate country - not to commit treason (a.k.a. being a traitor) against the Union. However, effectively, the Union said, "If you leave, we will kill you!" And they tried: Sherman's march to the sea was about as close a thing to mass fratricide as this planet has ever seen. Nor was the war about slavery (just like the statues are not about slavery). If it had been about slavery, if it had been a clear cut case case of good anti-slavers versus evil pro-slavers, there would have been no slave states allowed in the Union prior to and during the war; however, not only were there the slave states of Maryland, Missouri, Delaware, and Kentucky in the *saintly* North - the last states to free their slaves (well after the end of the war and not willingly but only due to the passing of the 13th Amendment) were the northern states of Delaware and Kentucky. And slavery was already on its way out even in the agrarian South prior to the start of the war.
When you, or anyone else says that people have a perfectly good reason or a right to be offended and remove a monument, it only promotes self-pity and grants affirming license for destruction and eventual anarchy based on events hundreds of years in the past. Despite how many have been brainwashed, no American would be better off if they were suddenly transported back to the land of their original ancestors - no European, no African, no Asian - no one. America is the planet's brass ring. Yet, this similarly bizarre, nonsensical opinion that removing statues is somehow going to improve someone's lot in life persists. In fact, if it continues it will likely (as we have seen) only foment tension and cause the ranks of despicable fascists like Antifa, the KKK, BLM, neo-Nazis, etc. to swell. For what? To what benefit? Would you tell those same misguided iconoclasts that they have a perfectly good reason or a right to desecrate the graves of those who might have fought for or were sympathetic to their homeland? Because that is where this is headed - and its coming to your home too, mark my words. When you hear some angry, ignorant dimwit yell the false adage, "This country was built on the blood of slaves!" and you cheer or nod in agreeing acquiescence... know that the Hermitage, Monmouth Battlefield, Boxwood Hall, Lakehurst Naval Air Station, the Jefferson Monument, the Washington Monument, and yes - even the Lincoln Memorial will be the targets someday, until no traditional brick is left unmolested.
|
| Posted 8/20/17 7:07 PM |
| |
|
smdl
I love Gary too..on a plate!
Member since 5/06 32461 total posts
Name:
me
|
Re: History
Posted by Diane
Someone wrote this on Facebook and happen to agree
Just like California trying to decide with the popular vote and dictate the rest of the country, the North wanted to control the south.
This is not mine, but is extremely informative.
When you state that Confederates were somehow traitors to their country or that the war was fought over the "right to own other people", it reveals a definite lack of understanding about American history in general and about the War Between the States specifically. We use the word "state" now to reference places like New Jersey or Texas or Virginia but when this country was new and young, people all around the world used the word "state" interchangeably and synonymous with the word "country" or "nation". Effectively, we were the United Countries of America. Each country/state was self governing and sovereign and each with an equal footing in the union of states. However, just as in the 2016 election when the heavily populated cities thought they should be allowed to rule the breadbasket of the nation, the northern states back then thought they should be able to impose their will and control the economy of the southern states because you know... majorities will be mobs and mobs will be mob-like. The self governing and sovereign southern states correctly said, "No, that is not how the United States was set up or how it was meant to be." Despite the erroneous and widely used misnomer, it was not a civil war; the Confederacy had no desire to overthrow any government or bring about the collapse of the Union. It was a War for Succession. The Confederacy of States only wanted to go its own separate way, be its own separate country - not to commit treason (a.k.a. being a traitor) against the Union. However, effectively, the Union said, "If you leave, we will kill you!" And they tried: Sherman's march to the sea was about as close a thing to mass fratricide as this planet has ever seen. Nor was the war about slavery (just like the statues are not about slavery). If it had been about slavery, if it had been a clear cut case case of good anti-slavers versus evil pro-slavers, there would have been no slave states allowed in the Union prior to and during the war; however, not only were there the slave states of Maryland, Missouri, Delaware, and Kentucky in the *saintly* North - the last states to free their slaves (well after the end of the war and not willingly but only due to the passing of the 13th Amendment) were the northern states of Delaware and Kentucky. And slavery was already on its way out even in the agrarian South prior to the start of the war.
When you, or anyone else says that people have a perfectly good reason or a right to be offended and remove a monument, it only promotes self-pity and grants affirming license for destruction and eventual anarchy based on events hundreds of years in the past. Despite how many have been brainwashed, no American would be better off if they were suddenly transported back to the land of their original ancestors - no European, no African, no Asian - no one. America is the planet's brass ring. Yet, this similarly bizarre, nonsensical opinion that removing statues is somehow going to improve someone's lot in life persists. In fact, if it continues it will likely (as we have seen) only foment tension and cause the ranks of despicable fascists like Antifa, the KKK, BLM, neo-Nazis, etc. to swell. For what? To what benefit? Would you tell those same misguided iconoclasts that they have a perfectly good reason or a right to desecrate the graves of those who might have fought for or were sympathetic to their homeland? Because that is where this is headed - and its coming to your home too, mark my words. When you hear some angry, ignorant dimwit yell the false adage, "This country was built on the blood of slaves!" and you cheer or nod in agreeing acquiescence... know that the Hermitage, Monmouth Battlefield, Boxwood Hall, Lakehurst Naval Air Station, the Jefferson Monument, the Washington Monument, and yes - even the Lincoln Memorial will be the targets someday, until no traditional brick is left unmolested.
.
Yes the North fought the South on the pretense of ending slavery. When it was really an economic war. The South had raw materials and cheap labor through slavery. But the South attained wealth with slavery. And Lee among many fought to keep the way of life of the South....Aka slavery. Because this is how the wealth originated. We can turn it and slice it and the real reasons of the war but the South has slavery and that about sums it all. You will not see statues of Hitler in the streets of Germany. Only in museums. History is history. Nothing will change that. But no need to shove it in people face either.
|
| Posted 8/20/17 7:36 PM |
| |
|
chilltocam
LIF Adult
Member since 11/11 9141 total posts
Name:
|
Re: History
Posted by Diane
Someone wrote this on Facebook and happen to agree
Just like California trying to decide with the popular vote and dictate the rest of the country, the North wanted to control the south.
This is not mine, but is extremely informative.
When you state that Confederates were somehow traitors to their country or that the war was fought over the "right to own other people", it reveals a definite lack of understanding about American history in general and about the War Between the States specifically. We use the word "state" now to reference places like New Jersey or Texas or Virginia but when this country was new and young, people all around the world used the word "state" interchangeably and synonymous with the word "country" or "nation". Effectively, we were the United Countries of America. Each country/state was self governing and sovereign and each with an equal footing in the union of states. However, just as in the 2016 election when the heavily populated cities thought they should be allowed to rule the breadbasket of the nation, the northern states back then thought they should be able to impose their will and control the economy of the southern states because you know... majorities will be mobs and mobs will be mob-like. The self governing and sovereign southern states correctly said, "No, that is not how the United States was set up or how it was meant to be." Despite the erroneous and widely used misnomer, it was not a civil war; the Confederacy had no desire to overthrow any government or bring about the collapse of the Union. It was a War for Succession. The Confederacy of States only wanted to go its own separate way, be its own separate country - not to commit treason (a.k.a. being a traitor) against the Union. However, effectively, the Union said, "If you leave, we will kill you!" And they tried: Sherman's march to the sea was about as close a thing to mass fratricide as this planet has ever seen. Nor was the war about slavery (just like the statues are not about slavery). If it had been about slavery, if it had been a clear cut case case of good anti-slavers versus evil pro-slavers, there would have been no slave states allowed in the Union prior to and during the war; however, not only were there the slave states of Maryland, Missouri, Delaware, and Kentucky in the *saintly* North - the last states to free their slaves (well after the end of the war and not willingly but only due to the passing of the 13th Amendment) were the northern states of Delaware and Kentucky. And slavery was already on its way out even in the agrarian South prior to the start of the war.
When you, or anyone else says that people have a perfectly good reason or a right to be offended and remove a monument, it only promotes self-pity and grants affirming license for destruction and eventual anarchy based on events hundreds of years in the past. Despite how many have been brainwashed, no American would be better off if they were suddenly transported back to the land of their original ancestors - no European, no African, no Asian - no one. America is the planet's brass ring. Yet, this similarly bizarre, nonsensical opinion that removing statues is somehow going to improve someone's lot in life persists. In fact, if it continues it will likely (as we have seen) only foment tension and cause the ranks of despicable fascists like Antifa, the KKK, BLM, neo-Nazis, etc. to swell. For what? To what benefit? Would you tell those same misguided iconoclasts that they have a perfectly good reason or a right to desecrate the graves of those who might have fought for or were sympathetic to their homeland? Because that is where this is headed - and its coming to your home too, mark my words. When you hear some angry, ignorant dimwit yell the false adage, "This country was built on the blood of slaves!" and you cheer or nod in agreeing acquiescence... know that the Hermitage, Monmouth Battlefield, Boxwood Hall, Lakehurst Naval Air Station, the Jefferson Monument, the Washington Monument, and yes - even the Lincoln Memorial will be the targets someday, until no traditional brick is left unmolested.
There are so many statements in this that are written as if they are FACT, but they are not, they are OPINION. I don't have time right now to go through it, but this article is not an unbiased review of our history. I would love to know the source of this, OP, if you could please provide it
|
| Posted 8/21/17 9:53 AM |
| |
|
Mill188
LIF Adult
Member since 3/09 3073 total posts
Name:
|
Re: History
Posted by GoldenRod
[As evil as we now know that slavery is, at the time, it was legal in our country, and almost expected, to own slaves. However, violently taking arms against the US to try to secede is the ultimate in treason. It's hard to find a more egregious offense against this country (maybe colluding with a known enemy of our country...).
It's two completely different stories. GW owning slaves is not even in the same ballpark as R.E. Lee committing treason against our country.
Also, the statues and images of GW don't worship the fact that he owned slaves, but that he was one of the Founding Fathers of our country. The Confederate statues celebrate the fact that these men fought against the United States. Museums acknowledge and remember GW's slaves, and many other of his negative attributes, but we don't celebrate them.
Nobody is looking to sanitize history, we just don't want to celebrate and worship treason.
I would bet many people in this country disagree with your thoughts on slavery. Legal or not at the time, many people still harbor ill feelings about it.
Based on your answer if they started to call for statues of Presidents that were slave owners or prominent figures like Chrtistopher Colombus (who was known to be a brutal slave owner) to be removed, would you disagree with them?
Yes, because as I stated before, slavery was legal, so you can't punish people for following the law during their time, no matter how horrible and evil the law was at the time.
Also, like I said before, statues of Washington or Columbus aren't celebrating their illegal evil activity. Statues of Confederates DO celebrate their illegal, treasonous activity.
There are a lot of laws I don't agree with, but if the law is in place, and someone is following it, they personally can't be criticized for following it. The law itself can be criticized, but not those actively following it.
Washington also didn't let his wife vote, didn't let non-land owners vote, etc. I don't blame him for those decisions, I blame the laws of the time. (which thankfully have changed)
But it was unclear if secession was illegal at the time. The South believed they were just dissolving a contract and that the North had voided that contract. The South looked at is as legal. The North obviously did not. The Supreme Court declared it illegal in 1868.
Civil War Facts
The causes for the war go so much deeper than slavery. It is such an interesting period of time to debate and study.
It would be awesome if instead of people clamoring for removal of statues and rioting full of hatred for each other, they would spend a little time reading about the civil war and learning something. The country was a mess with a lot of people feeling disenfranchised and mad at the government. The parallels to today are fascinating and honestly quite frightening.
Message edited 8/21/2017 10:48:35 AM.
|
| Posted 8/21/17 10:46 AM |
| |
|
JennP
LIF Adult
Member since 10/06 3986 total posts
Name:
Jenn
|
Re: History
Posted by Mill188
Posted by GoldenRod
[As evil as we now know that slavery is, at the time, it was legal in our country, and almost expected, to own slaves. However, violently taking arms against the US to try to secede is the ultimate in treason. It's hard to find a more egregious offense against this country (maybe colluding with a known enemy of our country...).
It's two completely different stories. GW owning slaves is not even in the same ballpark as R.E. Lee committing treason against our country.
Also, the statues and images of GW don't worship the fact that he owned slaves, but that he was one of the Founding Fathers of our country. The Confederate statues celebrate the fact that these men fought against the United States. Museums acknowledge and remember GW's slaves, and many other of his negative attributes, but we don't celebrate them.
Nobody is looking to sanitize history, we just don't want to celebrate and worship treason.
I would bet many people in this country disagree with your thoughts on slavery. Legal or not at the time, many people still harbor ill feelings about it.
Based on your answer if they started to call for statues of Presidents that were slave owners or prominent figures like Chrtistopher Colombus (who was known to be a brutal slave owner) to be removed, would you disagree with them?
Yes, because as I stated before, slavery was legal, so you can't punish people for following the law during their time, no matter how horrible and evil the law was at the time.
Also, like I said before, statues of Washington or Columbus aren't celebrating their illegal evil activity. Statues of Confederates DO celebrate their illegal, treasonous activity.
There are a lot of laws I don't agree with, but if the law is in place, and someone is following it, they personally can't be criticized for following it. The law itself can be criticized, but not those actively following it.
Washington also didn't let his wife vote, didn't let non-land owners vote, etc. I don't blame him for those decisions, I blame the laws of the time. (which thankfully have changed)
But it was unclear if secession was illegal at the time. The South believed they were just dissolving a contract and that the North had voided that contract. The South looked at is as legal. The North obviously did not. The Supreme Court declared it illegal in 1868.
Civil War Facts
The causes for the war go so much deeper than slavery. It is such an interesting period of time to debate and study.
It would be awesome if instead of people clamoring for removal of statues and rioting full of hatred for each other, they would spend a little time reading about the civil war and learning something. The country was a mess with a lot of people feeling disenfranchised and mad at the government. The parallels to today are fascinating and honestly quite frightening.
It's not quoting correctly but this is my response:
**************************************
The first sentence of your last paragraph is downright offensive.
You're accusing people who were marching AGAINST NAZIS of being full of hatred but others need to open books?
Ok
Message edited 8/21/2017 12:14:09 PM.
|
| Posted 8/21/17 12:12 PM |
| |
|
Mill188
LIF Adult
Member since 3/09 3073 total posts
Name:
|
Re: History
Posted by JennP
It's not quoting correctly but this is my response:
**************************************
The first sentence of your last paragraph is downright offensive.
You're accusing people who were marching AGAINST NAZIS of being full of hatred but others need to open books?
Ok
Not even close to what I am saying - I don't know where you came up with that interpretation. Why in the world would you assume when I wrote, "people....full of hatred for each other..." I was talking about people marching against Nazis??? 
|
| Posted 8/21/17 1:24 PM |
| |
|
ohbaby08
Winter is Coming
Member since 10/07 1718 total posts
Name:
|
Re: History
Posted by Diane
Someone wrote this on Facebook and happen to agree
Just like California trying to decide with the popular vote and dictate the rest of the country, the North wanted to control the south.
This is not mine, but is extremely informative.
When you state that Confederates were somehow traitors to their country or that the war was fought over the "right to own other people", it reveals a definite lack of understanding about American history in general and about the War Between the States specifically. We use the word "state" now to reference places like New Jersey or Texas or Virginia but when this country was new and young, people all around the world used the word "state" interchangeably and synonymous with the word "country" or "nation". Effectively, we were the United Countries of America. Each country/state was self governing and sovereign and each with an equal footing in the union of states. However, just as in the 2016 election when the heavily populated cities thought they should be allowed to rule the breadbasket of the nation, the northern states back then thought they should be able to impose their will and control the economy of the southern states because you know... majorities will be mobs and mobs will be mob-like. The self governing and sovereign southern states correctly said, "No, that is not how the United States was set up or how it was meant to be." Despite the erroneous and widely used misnomer, it was not a civil war; the Confederacy had no desire to overthrow any government or bring about the collapse of the Union. It was a War for Succession. The Confederacy of States only wanted to go its own separate way, be its own separate country - not to commit treason (a.k.a. being a traitor) against the Union. However, effectively, the Union said, "If you leave, we will kill you!" And they tried: Sherman's march to the sea was about as close a thing to mass fratricide as this planet has ever seen. Nor was the war about slavery (just like the statues are not about slavery). If it had been about slavery, if it had been a clear cut case case of good anti-slavers versus evil pro-slavers, there would have been no slave states allowed in the Union prior to and during the war; however, not only were there the slave states of Maryland, Missouri, Delaware, and Kentucky in the *saintly* North - the last states to free their slaves (well after the end of the war and not willingly but only due to the passing of the 13th Amendment) were the northern states of Delaware and Kentucky. And slavery was already on its way out even in the agrarian South prior to the start of the war.
When you, or anyone else says that people have a perfectly good reason or a right to be offended and remove a monument, it only promotes self-pity and grants affirming license for destruction and eventual anarchy based on events hundreds of years in the past. Despite how many have been brainwashed, no American would be better off if they were suddenly transported back to the land of their original ancestors - no European, no African, no Asian - no one. America is the planet's brass ring. Yet, this similarly bizarre, nonsensical opinion that removing statues is somehow going to improve someone's lot in life persists. In fact, if it continues it will likely (as we have seen) only foment tension and cause the ranks of despicable fascists like Antifa, the KKK, BLM, neo-Nazis, etc. to swell. For what? To what benefit? Would you tell those same misguided iconoclasts that they have a perfectly good reason or a right to desecrate the graves of those who might have fought for or were sympathetic to their homeland? Because that is where this is headed - and its coming to your home too, mark my words. When you hear some angry, ignorant dimwit yell the false adage, "This country was built on the blood of slaves!" and you cheer or nod in agreeing acquiescence... know that the Hermitage, Monmouth Battlefield, Boxwood Hall, Lakehurst Naval Air Station, the Jefferson Monument, the Washington Monument, and yes - even the Lincoln Memorial will be the targets someday, until no traditional brick is left unmolested.
Good lord, this is the worst thing I've read in a while. Factual inaccurate and just ridiculous. Did Steve Bannon write this? Did it come from Breitbart? It oozes with his brand of grandiosity.
No one is going to try to remove the Lincoln memorial, Washington Monument, etc. Let's get real. Lincoln fought to END slavery. Why would we remove his memorial? Washington, although he owned slaves, founded our country! Why would we remove his monument?
They just removed a statue in Maryland of Roger Taney, who was the writer of the Dred Scott decision. Do you think he deserved a statue? Why are there confederate statues in states that weren't even part of the US when the civil war took place? What's the purpose of that? No civil war history took place there.
Pick up a book and learn about our country's history. The good and bad of it. The removal of a statue isn't going to change our past.
|
| Posted 8/22/17 9:08 AM |
| |
|
LIRascal
drama. daily.
Member since 3/11 7287 total posts
Name:
Michelle
|
History
Remember when these statues were erected that the Civil War was long over. The monuments represent more of an era of hate (nativism) than slavery.
The Civil War was fought over the issue of States' rights vs. the Federal government's authority, NOT slavery as the only issue per se.
|
| Posted 8/22/17 12:08 PM |
| |
|
shadows
LIF Adult
Member since 1/10 4694 total posts
Name:
|
History
I read that there's a petition to replace a statue in VA with a statue of Missy Elliott - anyone else see this?
A few posters talked about this becoming a slippery slope. Here in Boston, they are discussing renaming Faneuil Hall (because apparently Faneuil was a slave owner) and Yawkey Way, the famous road Fenway Park is on (because Yawkey was a racist). As left wing as Boston is, people are notttttt happy about either. I just fear that we may go too far with this.
|
| Posted 8/22/17 2:21 PM |
| |
|
NervousNell
Just another chapter in life..
Member since 11/09 54921 total posts
Name:
..being a mommy and being a wife!
|
Re: History
Posted by shadows
I read that there's a petition to replace a statue in VA with a statue of Missy Elliott - anyone else see this?
A few posters talked about this becoming a slippery slope. Here in Boston, they are discussing renaming Faneuil Hall (because apparently Faneuil was a slave owner) and Yawkey Way, the famous road Fenway Park is on (because Yawkey was a racist). As left wing as Boston is, people are notttttt happy about either. I just fear that we may go too far with this.
Missy Elliott?
That can't be for real.
|
| Posted 8/22/17 2:30 PM |
| |
|
JennP
LIF Adult
Member since 10/06 3986 total posts
Name:
Jenn
|
Re: History
Posted by Mill188
Posted by JennP
It's not quoting correctly but this is my response:
**************************************
The first sentence of your last paragraph is downright offensive.
You're accusing people who were marching AGAINST NAZIS of being full of hatred but others need to open books?
Ok
Not even close to what I am saying - I don't know where you came up with that interpretation. Why in the world would you assume when I wrote, "people....full of hatred for each other..." I was talking about people marching against Nazis???
Direct quote from your post:
******************************
It would be awesome if instead of people clamoring for removal of statues and rioting full of hatred for each other, they would spend a little time reading about the civil war and learning something.
|
| Posted 8/23/17 2:05 PM |
| |
|
Diane
Hope is Contagious....catch it
Member since 5/05 30683 total posts
Name:
D
|
Re: History
we cant erase the past, Im just wondering why all the removal of statues , passed leaders owning slaves become an issue now??
Why not a year ago, why not 5 years ago??
|
| Posted 8/26/17 9:58 AM |
| |
|
Pumpkin1
LIF Adult
Member since 12/05 3715 total posts
Name:
|
Re: History
Posted by Jenhos
Posted by RainyDay
Posted by Palebride
A few thoughts:
History is taught in schools. History is taught in museums. Taking down Confederate monuments will not cause history to be forgotten....but it will show all of those victimized by slavery that they matter.
Traitors should not be memorialized. They should be remembered, but not honored.
The majority of the Confederate statues were put up quickly and cheaply and they're not even worth keeping anyway....did you see how easily that one was torn down and how it crumpled? Why keep that?
Germany does not honor the Nazis or Hitler....they honor the victims of those people. They know their country has an horrific past, so they work really hard to make sure that the evil that was done by them is not forgotten....but it is also not glorified. We could learn a thing of two from them!
I don't disagree but why stop at Confederate statues. We celebrate presidents that owned that slaves (regardless if it was legal at the time)
Do you know that these monuments were built decades after the war ended? I believe some were built close to a century later. How is that history?
|
| Posted 8/27/17 11:33 AM |
| |
|
Chai77
Brighter days ahead
Member since 4/07 7364 total posts
Name:
|
Re: History
Posted by Diane
we cant erase the past, Im just wondering why all the removal of statues , passed leaders owning slaves become an issue now??
Why not a year ago, why not 5 years ago??
Are you seriously asking this question or just playing dumb?
I do think it has been a point of contention for many years, to one degree or another, by the way.
But it's come to the forefront now because of the normalization of the "Alt Right"/white supremacy courtesy of your fearless leader Donnie Dump. That's why.
|
| Posted 8/27/17 10:17 PM |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] |
Potentially Related Topics:
Currently 795414 users on the LIFamilies.com Chat
|
Long Island Bridal Shows
|
