American History

Happygoluckky

Well-known member
So there is still a confederacy of sorts, we should fly a nazi/rebel flag. That would strike terror in you gals hearts
You start the movement...put the flags in your front yard, bumper stickers on your car and post it on your facebook and linkedin. Don't be a p#ssy if you believe it embrace it...at work (if you are employed) put some stuff up in your cubicle or work space. Go all in
 

zeeman

Well-known member
You start the movement...put the flags in your front yard, bumper stickers on your car and post it on your facebook and linkedin. Don't be a p#ssy if you believe it embrace it...at work (if you are employed) put some stuff up in your cubicle or work space. Go all in
I think I might! I’m going to be as completely looney and radical as you!
 

oskar

Well-known member
Not quite
Reconstruction ended in 1877


"The most recent comprehensive study of Confederate statues and monuments across the country was published by the Southern Poverty Law Center last year. A look at this chart shows huge spikes in construction twice during the 20th century: in the early 1900s, and then again in the 1950s and 60s. Both were times of extreme civil rights tension. "


View attachment 8068


“Eventually they started to build [Confederate] monuments,” he says. “The vast majority of them were built between the 1890s and 1950s, which matches up exactly with the era of Jim Crow segregation.” According to the Southern Poverty Law Center’s research, the biggest spike was between 1900 and the 1920s.
" backlash to the Civil Rights Movement was spreading Confederate symbols in other ways: In 1956, Georgia redesigned its state flag to include the Confederate battle flag; and in 1962, South Carolina placed the flag atop its capitol building. "



In other words many of these statues were built to send a message to Blacks still fighting for equal rights that we down here believe in what the South fought for.
The South may have lost the war but the Confederate culture never died. Blacks need to have that constant reminder to know their place and not get too uppity. There simply is no way you can exclude the subordination of blacks from the glorification of the Confederacy.
 

Omar

Well-known member
"I would say this drastically oversimplification of the morality of the Civil War makes me SMH." Gosh we have the Confederates fighting to break up the United States of America and to create a nation to protect and expand the institution of chattel slavery. Boy that was a bad thing to fight for.
If you think slavery was the only reason for the Civil War, you’re an idiot.
 

chs1971

Well-known member
Most of these monuments that people just suddenly found themselves caring about deeply as they learned about their existence in the "fake news" belong in museums.

We've toppled statues of fallen regimes abroad. It makes zero sense to have statues and displays publically honoring a traitorous short-lived loser at home. Go see and learn about them at your local museum, historical society or preserved battlefield.
I've been to lots of museums. Haven't seen many monuments in them.
 

isadore

Well-known member
If you think slavery was the only reason for the Civil War, you’re an idiot.
If you think slavery was the only reason for the Civil War, you’re an idiot.
gosh dofus,
It is the be all and end all of reasons for the South leaving the Union and starting the Civil War. They admit it in their secession documents.

Some apologists claim that they were fighting for States Rights. What state right, the state right to have chattel slavery.

A few like pseudo historian Thomas Lorenzo will put claim tariff was a driving issue. The tariff issue was important to the South because their economy was based on the export sale of cash crops, tobacco, rice and by far most importantly cotton. What Lorenzo and others ignore is that the raising of all these items was based on and made profitable by a chattel slave labor force.
 

SWMCinci

Well-known member
Obviously there was a reason to build the statue, name the building/ road etc. I look at Marge Schott's name being taken off the baseball field at UC. Obviously they graciously took the $2 mill back when they needed it, and she was already dead at the time so there hasn't been any new history on Schott. She gave to many charities in the Cincinnati area and employed people of all races. We never agree 100% with everything a person does.
I think if schools and governments want to rename buildings and elements that used donated money, they should give the money back to the Foundation/person that they received it from.
 

SWMCinci

Well-known member
gosh dofus,
It is the be all and end all of reasons for the South leaving the Union and starting the Civil War. They admit it in their secession documents.
.........
It doesn't matter. Slavery was legal. As was indentured servitude, serfdom, forced labor, and unpaid apprenticeships. What point are you trying to make?
 

chs1971

Well-known member
gosh dofus,
It is the be all and end all of reasons for the South leaving the Union and starting the Civil War. They admit it in their secession documents.

Some apologists claim that they were fighting for States Rights. What state right, the state right to have chattel slavery.

A few like pseudo historian Thomas Lorenzo will put claim tariff was a driving issue. The tariff issue was important to the South because their economy was based on the export sale of cash crops, tobacco, rice and by far most importantly cotton. What Lorenzo and others ignore is that the raising of all these items was based on and made profitable by a chattel slave labor force.
And the one thing we know for sure is that politicians always tell the truth.

And export tariffs are unconstitutional and have never existed in the USA.
 

isadore

Well-known member
It doesn't matter. Slavery was legal. As was indentured servitude, serfdom, forced labor, and unpaid apprenticeships. What point are you trying to make?
what doesn't matter, the slave owners that controlled the South felt the election of a Republican President threatened their "peculiar institution" and led the drive to secession.
 

isadore

Well-known member
And the one thing we know for sure is that politicians always tell the truth.

And export tariffs are unconstitutional and have never existed in the USA.
tariffs are not part of my argument but of those who say the Civil War was fought for reasons other than slavery. In their argument tariffs effected their trade by effecting the price of manufactured goods they imported from Europe.
 

JUSTGOPLAY

Well-known member
Jeepers.......I never thought about all this stuff. I guess all the rioting, and looting, and burning, and crying, and occupying, and tearing down statues, and stomping of feet, and making normal folks lives miserable is justified......Nah, it's just an excuse for the Leftists to create anarchy.
 

SWMCinci

Well-known member
gosh a ruddies Confederate Generals committed treason and fought for a regime created to protect chattel slavery and caused they caused the deaths of 400,000 Union soldiers.
Whatever you want to claim, slavery was legal in the United States in 1861 at the time of the creation of the Confederacy. It was already protected in the United States, and no laws had been passed to change that except in individual states. Nor had there been any proposals to change that.

Treason - the crime of betraying one's country, especially by attempting to kill the sovereign or overthrow the government.

Interesting point, there's a reason to not honor them, but claiming "treason" is not one of them. What "treason" did they commit? The "United States of America" is a confederation of sovereign states that joined together for mutual benefit. The Confederate States, elected to remove themselves from the confederation known as the "United States of America" and join the "Confederate States of America". A rival organization assuredly, but the Confederate officers that had served in the United States military actually resigned their commissions from the United States military and joined the new organization. The country they fought for was the "Confederate States of America" as recognized combatants and did not seek to overthrow the "United States" government, but protect the "Confederate States" government from an invading force from another country, eventually taking that war to the other country. There was a reason that most of the war was fought as a defensive struggle by the South and there were few incursions into the territory controlled by the North. Technically, they didn't commit "treason".

But you ignore the fact that all Confederate troops were granted paroles as terms of their surrender, there were some exceptions. Those soldiers that fought for the Confederacy but lived in states that did not secede were not entitled to return home as general parolees. They had to apply for permission from various commissions and the war department. Three years later, all combatants were granted pardons with one exception Robert E. Lee. His pardon and citizenship wasn't returned until 1975.

Parole - the release of a prisoner temporarily (for a special purpose) or permanently before the completion of a sentence, on the promise of good behavior.
Pardon - the action of forgiving or being forgiven for an error or offense.

So, as of 1869 or so, when discussing the activities of Confederate soldiers, they were not treasonous by any definition. But you perpetuate that position, why? I get that a parolee has simply been released from the punishment terms of their sentence. Do you feel that people that have been pardoned aren't to be treated as innocent and should continually be treated as guilty? So by your standard, black people that are pardoned are still guilty and should be treated as such?

You also ignore the fact that Confederate soldiers were conferred veteran status in the 1950s. - Confederate soldiers, sailors, and Marines that fought in the Civil war were made U.S. Veterans by an act of Congress in in 1957, U.S. Public Law 85-425, Sec 410, Approved 23 May, 1958. This made all Confederate Army/ Navy/ Marine Veterans equal to U.S. Veterans. So you in essence are attacking the honored service provided by veterans.

Your position isn't viable.
 

SC10EHS15

Active member
Just for kicks, have you ever started a thread? OR are you like eastside purple and just tear others down?
I've never started a thread in the debate forum. There's too many on the littlest of things (ie, this) as is. I was rude, but I think it's a stupid thread. Oh well.
 

SC10EHS15

Active member
Statues start conversations.... no statues, no reminders. I have no issues with statues being removed but do have issues with the mob tearing them down.
So do you or do you not want them taken down? Your first sentence suggests that they should stay up, but your second clearly says otherwise...
 

SayMyName

Well-known member
I don't have a huge problem with removal of Confederate statues, Robert E. Lee, Jefferson Davis etc... Removing Grant, Washington, Jefferson, Mattias Baldwin etc is wrong. Just tearing sh@t down because you're woke is silly.
 

SC10EHS15

Active member
Obviously there was a reason to build the statue, name the building/ road etc. I look at Marge Schott's name being taken off the baseball field at UC. Obviously they graciously took the $2 mill back when they needed it, and she was already dead at the time so there hasn't been any new history on Schott. She gave to many charities in the Cincinnati area and employed people of all races. We never agree 100% with everything a person does.
Marge Schott's name being on buildings and erecting statues of slave owners and Confederate soldiers are completely different. Those in the Confederacy have no business being celebrated and that's what statues do. Pro athletes retire and, if they've made a big enough impact for their team, organizations put statues up outside of the arenas/stadiums. Your a Reds fan; this is why we've got statues of Frank Robinson, Big Klu, Nuxhall, etc. They're worth honoring in the world of baseball. What did those Confederate generals and soldiers do that was worth celebrating? They're only remembered because they fought in a war started over the right to own slaves.

On the Marge front, yes, she donated money and employed people of all races; it was the 80's and 90's in a post-Civil Rights Movement world, she couldn't just not have people of color on staff or refuse to hire them. I'd argue those practices were to make herself look better than she was. Not exactly an uncommon practice for slimy people. But when you look at the things she said about black people and Hitler/Nazis, you could see her true colors and how she really felt. All of what she said was also not really a secret so if the people accepting her donations knew that she said those kinds of things, shame on them. Some may not have known given the times and that not every single thing a person said was broadcast all over the place.
 

SC10EHS15

Active member
If you think slavery was the only reason for the Civil War, you’re an idiot.
"The Civil War started because of uncompromising differences between the free and slave states over the power of the national government to prohibit slavery in the territories that had not yet become states. When Abraham Lincoln won election in 1860 as the first Republican president on a platform pledging to keep slavery out of the territories, seven slave states in the deep South seceded and formed a new nation, the Confederate States of America. The incoming Lincoln administration and most of the Northern people refused to recognize the legitimacy of secession. They feared that it would discredit democracy and create a fatal precedent that would eventually fragment the no-longer United States into several small, squabbling countries."

Long story short: slavery.
 

Omar

Well-known member
"The Civil War started because of uncompromising differences between the free and slave states over the power of the national government to prohibit slavery in the territories that had not yet become states. When Abraham Lincoln won election in 1860 as the first Republican president on a platform pledging to keep slavery out of the territories, seven slave states in the deep South seceded and formed a new nation, the Confederate States of America. The incoming Lincoln administration and most of the Northern people refused to recognize the legitimacy of secession. They feared that it would discredit democracy and create a fatal precedent that would eventually fragment the no-longer United States into several small, squabbling countries."

Long story short: slavery.
That must be from the “Idiots Guide to the Civil War”


 

SC10EHS15

Active member
Lololol, it's from a .org website not from opinion pieces from the Orlando Sentinel or Baltimore Sun lmaoooooo now, was it the ONLY reason? No, but it was the overwhelmingly overarching reason.
 

SWMCinci

Well-known member
Not quite
Reconstruction ended in 1877
.........

In other words many of these statues were built to send a message to Blacks still fighting for equal rights that we down here believe in what the South fought for.
Probably not, but keep trying. Slavery was never coming back, and you'd be hard pressed to find anyone writing at the time that even suggested it. It was more of a result of a backlash to the terms and conditions of reconstruction. The vast majority of southerners didn't own slaves. As it is today, most people don't give a rats arse about the worries of black people, gay people, feminists, Hispanics, Asians, etc. unless they choose to - and most people don't choose to. They want to be left alone to be able to live their lives as they see fit to the best of their ability. The backlash was to restore some of what was taken away, not the slavery, but the culture, history, and other elements that made the South a distinct region. There was a romanticism about the "Lost Cause" of the war and most of the veterans (on both sides) talked about the chivalry and honor of the actual battles and warfare. So much so that within 20 or so years they were celebrating anniversaries together.

Most of the BLM movement is crap. It's built on a tower of lies about what cops do and don't do. They aren't hunting blacks, they don't kill blacks in greater numbers than whites, they don't get joy out of being mean to blacks. Where black people have a legitimate beef is in the justice system, but the actions of cops are for the most part (99.999% of the time) legitimate and warranted. It's what happens after arrest where the real problems are apparent.

What is going on now is going to generate backlash. Tearing down statues of Washington, Jefferson, the good Roosevelt, Columbus, defunding the police and allowing domestic terrorists to control the streets, etc are going to cause a backlash primarily among the people that don't give a rats arse about any of it because they don't feel guilty about what their ancestors did because they don't believe that they benefitted for many of it and are not going to be made to feel guilty about being white or Asian. They aren't racist, don't like racists, but they also don't want to be made to feel guilty about being white and recognize that feckless politicians don't care if they spend other people's money buying a moment of peace instead of actually thinking about what is going on. I think this has the potential to drive people to vote for Trump as a defense to stop racial pandering.
 

Omar

Well-known member
Lololol, it's from a .org website not from opinion pieces from the Orlando Sentinel or Baltimore Sun lmaoooooo now, was it the ONLY reason? No, but it was the overwhelmingly overarching reason.
 
.
Top