ADVERTISEMENT

“History is not there for you to like or dislike.....

It is there for you to learn from it. And if it offends you, even better. Because then you are less likely to repeat it. It’s not yours to erase. It belongs to all of us.” – Unknown

Tear anything pertaining to the history of the South down. Hmm???
I couldn't agree more with this. I'm not a fan of tearing down confederate statues... Those are a part of our history AND they are art. I do agree that they should not be on government property as they do recall an actual rebellion against said government... but a museum is absolutely fine. Removing that sculpture from Stone Mountain is absolutely stupid.

The other side of that is true as well. Slavery was a thing in this country. So were the Jim Crow laws that codified racism into the very fabric of America. Critical Race Theory is simply a theory that racism has been codified into the laws of the USA and that that persists to this day. There's no doubt that this USED to be true. But with the civil rights acts in the 60s, that's MOSTLY gone away. Thus the theory part instead of fact. But teaching the really crappy way folks of African descent were treated in this country is not a bad thing either. It's just history and bringing CRT into that is legit IMHO.
 
I couldn't agree more with this. I'm not a fan of tearing down confederate statues... Those are a part of our history AND they are art. I do agree that they should not be on government property as they do recall an actual rebellion against said government... but a museum is absolutely fine. Removing that sculpture from Stone Mountain is absolutely stupid.

The other side of that is true as well. Slavery was a thing in this country. So were the Jim Crow laws that codified racism into the very fabric of America. Critical Race Theory is simply a theory that racism has been codified into the laws of the USA and that that persists to this day. There's no doubt that this USED to be true. But with the civil rights acts in the 60s, that's MOSTLY gone away. Thus the theory part instead of fact. But teaching the really crappy way folks of African descent were treated in this country is not a bad thing either. It's just history and bringing CRT into that is legit IMHO.
Rebellion? Interesting take
 
I couldn't agree more with this. I'm not a fan of tearing down confederate statues... Those are a part of our history AND they are art. I do agree that they should not be on government property as they do recall an actual rebellion against said government... but a museum is absolutely fine. Removing that sculpture from Stone Mountain is absolutely stupid.

The other side of that is true as well. Slavery was a thing in this country. So were the Jim Crow laws that codified racism into the very fabric of America. Critical Race Theory is simply a theory that racism has been codified into the laws of the USA and that that persists to this day. There's no doubt that this USED to be true. But with the civil rights acts in the 60s, that's MOSTLY gone away. Thus the theory part instead of fact. But teaching the really crappy way folks of African descent were treated in this country is not a bad thing either. It's just history and bringing CRT into that is legit IMHO.
Very reasoned, rational take. Which means it will be poorly received by at least half of both parties 😂
 
Speaking as a former history grad student (left when I was at the ABD phase), the Confederates were traitors to our country, who fought solely to preserve their "right" to hold other people in perpetual bondage as property. After the war, many of them tried to bring back slavery in all but name (black codes) and launched domestic terror campaigns to end Reconstruction ("Redemption"). They got off too leniently. A lot of Confederate monuments were erected during the 1910s as a counter to early civil rights pushes and to try to keep African Americans in their place. You see it crop up again in the 50s and 60s after Brown v Board. After segregation is declared unconstitutional, you see Georgia put the confederate flag back in their state flag, and stuff like that. Flying the confederate flag and keeping confederate monuments up is a disgrace to our country and the men who fought and died to preserve it.
 
I couldn't agree more with this. I'm not a fan of tearing down confederate statues... Those are a part of our history AND they are art. I do agree that they should not be on government property as they do recall an actual rebellion against said government... but a museum is absolutely fine. Removing that sculpture from Stone Mountain is absolutely stupid.

The other side of that is true as well. Slavery was a thing in this country. So were the Jim Crow laws that codified racism into the very fabric of America. Critical Race Theory is simply a theory that racism has been codified into the laws of the USA and that that persists to this day. There's no doubt that this USED to be true. But with the civil rights acts in the 60s, that's MOSTLY gone away. Thus the theory part instead of fact. But teaching the really crappy way folks of African descent were treated in this country is not a bad thing either. It's just history and bringing CRT into that is legit IMHO.
CRT has gotta be one of the most understand academic terms out there and has become a catchall for "things I don't like/things that point out racism in American history." It is/was mainly an academic law thing and about how there were and are structural inequalities in American society with regards to race, both in the law and outside of the law, see redlining for instance.
 
Honest question, what would you call
Honest question, what would you call it?
The constitution is silent on a states right to secede. Therefore it is a states rights issue.

When states decided to secede their former country decided they didn’t like their decision to do so (which is what that war was fought over ironically, some states trying to control others)

I realize scotus ruled several years after the war that secession is not a right for the states (they missed that one in my opinion).

So I’d call it an exercise in rights followed by a tyrant attacking and causing 100’s of thousands of deaths.

And I’m related to Lincoln……
 
Speaking as a former history grad student (left when I was at the ABD phase), the Confederates were traitors to our country, who fought solely to preserve their "right" to hold other people in perpetual bondage as property. After the war, many of them tried to bring back slavery in all but name (black codes) and launched domestic terror campaigns to end Reconstruction ("Redemption"). They got off too leniently. A lot of Confederate monuments were erected during the 1910s as a counter to early civil rights pushes and to try to keep African Americans in their place. You see it crop up again in the 50s and 60s after Brown v Board. After segregation is declared unconstitutional, you see Georgia put the confederate flag back in their state flag, and stuff like that. Flying the confederate flag and keeping confederate monuments up is a disgrace to our country and the men who fought and died to preserve it.
How long Reconstruction last in the South? Could that be a reason that monuments weren't erected earlier?

How long did it take the South to recover financially from the war? Could that be a reason that monuments weren't erected earlier?

Northern towns have statues honoring Northern veterans too. When did most of them go up? Hint: The majority of Union monuments were erected from 1880 to 1918.

The statues are nothing but small towns honoring their sons that went off to war. No different than the tons of monuments in England and France for their boys who died in WW1.
 
Last edited:
How long Reconstruction last in the South? Could that be a reason that monuments weren't erected earlier?

How long did it take the South to recovering financially from the war? Could that be a reason that monuments weren't erected earlier?

Northern towns have statues honoring Northern veterans too. When did most of them go up? Hint: The majority of Union monuments were erected from 1880 to 1918.

The statues are nothing but small towns honoring their sons that went off to war. No different than the tons of monuments in England and France to their boys who died in WW1.
I agree with this to a certain extent. I also stand by my rebellion stance (and all my folks that I've heard about fought for the South). I've no problem with memorials to people that died. I still don't believe that they belong on government property, but it's just plain wrong to get rid of them.
 
Speaking as a former history grad student (left when I was at the ABD phase), the Confederates were traitors to our country, who fought solely to preserve their "right" to hold other people in perpetual bondage as property. After the war, many of them tried to bring back slavery in all but name (black codes) and launched domestic terror campaigns to end Reconstruction ("Redemption"). They got off too leniently. A lot of Confederate monuments were erected during the 1910s as a counter to early civil rights pushes and to try to keep African Americans in their place. You see it crop up again in the 50s and 60s after Brown v Board. After segregation is declared unconstitutional, you see Georgia put the confederate flag back in their state flag, and stuff like that. Flying the confederate flag and keeping confederate monuments up is a disgrace to our country and the men who fought and died to preserve it.
Being such a huge history buff you would agree that Robert E Lee is one of the finest men our nation has ever seen? Or not?
 
Being such a huge history buff you would agree that Robert E Lee is one of the finest men our nation has ever seen? Or not?
Absolutely not. He was a slave owner in general but he was also harsh towards his slaves and may have whipped them himself. He took an oath to serve our country and broke it. He was not a military genius like he's made out to be either and benefitted from fighting crappy Union generals. He is despicable and a traitor.
 
How long Reconstruction last in the South? Could that be a reason that monuments weren't erected earlier?

How long did it take the South to recovering financially from the war? Could that be a reason that monuments weren't erected earlier?

Northern towns have statues honoring Northern veterans too. When did most of them go up? Hint: The majority of Union monuments were erected from 1880 to 1918.

The statues are nothing but small towns honoring their sons that went off to war. No different than the tons of monuments in England and France to their boys who died in WW1.
A lot of rich people pre-Civil War still had money after the war. Sons of Confederate Veterans and Daughters of the Confederacy fundraised money to build the monuments. Reconstruction lasted until 1876ish in SC. A lot of this stuff is talked about in books like Race and Reunion by David Blight (trying to think of others) which I read in grad school. In general there is a lot of very good and well written historical scholarship looking into this stuff. Basically there was a view of the war immediately after the war that ultimately the point was to free the slaves, which it was by the end. Over the course of the 1890s and early 1900s you see those emancipatory goals shed, with the war being viewed as a war between brothers. The 1890s are when these monuments go up and exactly when the white Southerners are instituting Jim Crow segregation and when lynching starts picking up. I say tear em all down and put a few in museums.
 
The constitution is silent on a states right to secede. Therefore it is a states rights issue.

When states decided to secede their former country decided they didn’t like their decision to do so (which is what that war was fought over ironically, some states trying to control others)

I realize scotus ruled several years after the war that secession is not a right for the states (they missed that one in my opinion).

So I’d call it an exercise in rights followed by a tyrant attacking and causing 100’s of thousands of deaths.

And I’m related to Lincoln……
A state's right to do what exactly?

How can you call Lincoln a tyrant? He was, imo, the best president we've ever had. He initially didn't want to interfere with slavery where it currently existed; that was a major part of his and the GOP's platform in 1860. Slavery can exist in the states where it currently did but it can't extend into the territories. Expansion of slavery into the territories would rob people of the ability to move up in the world economically. Southerns only cared about state's rights when it benefitted them. They were totally fine with trampling on state's rights and personal liberty laws during the 1850s.
 
When you change the name of a military base or take down a confederate statue you are not erasing history. You are simply not honoring those who are not deserving of honor. Naming us military bases for confederate generals is like naming them for Nazi generals. How does the Hermann Goring airbase sound?
 
I couldn't agree more with this. I'm not a fan of tearing down confederate statues... Those are a part of our history AND they are art. I do agree that they should not be on government property as they do recall an actual rebellion against said government... but a museum is absolutely fine. Removing that sculpture from Stone Mountain is absolutely stupid.

The other side of that is true as well. Slavery was a thing in this country. So were the Jim Crow laws that codified racism into the very fabric of America. Critical Race Theory is simply a theory that racism has been codified into the laws of the USA and that that persists to this day. There's no doubt that this USED to be true. But with the civil rights acts in the 60s, that's MOSTLY gone away. Thus the theory part instead of fact. But teaching the really crappy way folks of African descent were treated in this country is not a bad thing either. It's just history and bringing CRT into that is legit IMHO.
As long as we are including all the facts then sure. You know like there were slaves in the US that were not necessarily of the African American persuasion. Oh and the real elephant in the room that everyone seems to sweep under the rug of white shame..There were black slave owners as well. Oops…
 
I couldn't agree more with this. I'm not a fan of tearing down confederate statues... Those are a part of our history AND they are art. I do agree that they should not be on government property as they do recall an actual rebellion against said government... but a museum is absolutely fine. Removing that sculpture from Stone Mountain is absolutely stupid.

The other side of that is true as well. Slavery was a thing in this country. So were the Jim Crow laws that codified racism into the very fabric of America. Critical Race Theory is simply a theory that racism has been codified into the laws of the USA and that that persists to this day. There's no doubt that this USED to be true. But with the civil rights acts in the 60s, that's MOSTLY gone away. Thus the theory part instead of fact. But teaching the really crappy way folks of African descent were treated in this country is not a bad thing either. It's just history and bringing CRT into that is legit IMHO.
Hell...the Jews were slaves a thousand or so years before.

There's a lot more to slavery that hasn't been brought into the light. Why? Changes the truth. Changes "facts".
 
A state's right to do what exactly?

How can you call Lincoln a tyrant? He was, imo, the best president we've ever had. He initially didn't want to interfere with slavery where it currently existed; that was a major part of his and the GOP's platform in 1860. Slavery can exist in the states where it currently did but it can't extend into the territories. Expansion of slavery into the territories would rob people of the ability to move up in the world economically. Southerns only cared about state's rights when it benefitted them. They were totally fine with trampling on state's rights and personal liberty laws during the 1850s.
A states right to govern itself. As a history buff I’d expect an understanding of that as it’s a fundamental concept of our constitution.

Also, you are completely and totally wrong on Lee.

If Lincoln doesn’t commit acts of terrorism slavery would have died out in the next two decades, as it did in the north.

Interesting what history books say these days isn’t it.
 
As long as we are including all the facts then sure. You know like there were slaves in the US that were not necessarily of the African American persuasion. Oh and the real elephant in the room that everyone seems to sweep under the rug of white shame..There were black slave owners as well. Oops…
People caught and brought those slaves to market in Africa....by another black tribe that was warring with those captured.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FightingDevilTiger
As long as we are including all the facts then sure. You know like there were slaves in the US that were not necessarily of the African American persuasion. Oh and the real elephant in the room that everyone seems to sweep under the rug of white shame..There were black slave owners as well. Oops…
Yes, there were also Native American slaves, and in fact they were the first slaves in the country. This was common in the early 1600s, including among the Puritans and their descendants in New England. They would sell Native Americans into slavery in the Caribbean. However, this fell out of practice during the 1600s as the local native populations were killed off through war and disease. Africans quickly became the main source of slave labor and native slaves almost vanish entirely. Or do you also mean the slaves who were of mixed race but considered black due to the "one drop rule"? Mixed race slaves existed because it was common practice for slave owners to rape enslaved women and then keep the kids as slaves too. Thomas Jefferson did this. You also have white indentured servants during the 1600s but that falls out of practice for a number of reasons and at the end of the day, being an indentured servant was a heck of a lot better than being a slave, partially because you were an indentured servant for a few years, not life.

Also black slave owners aren't swept under the rug. It is recognized in historical scholarship and the historical record. However, black slave owners were relatively rare, particularly after the early 1700s as racial laws amd attitudes governing African slavery became more hardened and black skin was increasingly associated with being enslaved. Places like Virginia made it illegal to free your slaves for instance. You really only see black slave owners, with a few exceptions, in areas that were influenced by non-American/Anglo culture and law, namely French Louisiana. It is almost important to note that non-white slave owners only owned black slaves.
 
Speaking as a former history grad student (left when I was at the ABD phase), the Confederates were traitors to our country, who fought solely to preserve their "right" to hold other people in perpetual bondage as property. After the war, many of them tried to bring back slavery in all but name (black codes) and launched domestic terror campaigns to end Reconstruction ("Redemption"). They got off too leniently. A lot of Confederate monuments were erected during the 1910s as a counter to early civil rights pushes and to try to keep African Americans in their place. You see it crop up again in the 50s and 60s after Brown v Board. After segregation is declared unconstitutional, you see Georgia put the confederate flag back in their state flag, and stuff like that. Flying the confederate flag and keeping confederate monuments up is a disgrace to our country and the men who fought and died to preserve it.
Disagree, not with the slavery part, but a lot of monuments are to recognize leaders of men who did die for what they thought was right for the country in that era. It just a part of our history, and it can't be erased.
 
Last edited:
Speaking as a former history grad student (left when I was at the ABD phase), the Confederates were traitors to our country, who fought solely to preserve their "right" to hold other people in perpetual bondage as property. After the war, many of them tried to bring back slavery in all but name (black codes) and launched domestic terror campaigns to end Reconstruction ("Redemption"). They got off too leniently. A lot of Confederate monuments were erected during the 1910s as a counter to early civil rights pushes and to try to keep African Americans in their place. You see it crop up again in the 50s and 60s after Brown v Board. After segregation is declared unconstitutional, you see Georgia put the confederate flag back in their state flag, and stuff like that. Flying the confederate flag and keeping confederate monuments up is a disgrace to our country and the men who fought and died to preserve it.
100% agree with every bit of this
 
A states right to govern itself. As a history buff I’d expect an understanding of that as it’s a fundamental concept of our constitution.

Also, you are completely and totally wrong on Lee.

If Lincoln doesn’t commit acts of terrorism slavery would have died out in the next two decades, as it did in the north.

Interesting what history books say these days isn’t it.
What acts of terrorism did Lincoln commit? What state's rights did he infringe upon? Why did southern states secede before Lincoln was even inaugurated? Why was Lincoln so worried about being assassinated in 1861 that he had to sneak into DC?

To say that slavery would have simply died out is the benfit of hindsight. The sectional crisis of the 1850s showed that slave owners would do anything they could to expand slavery. They destroyed the Missouri Compromise, they send armed pro slavery gangs into Kansas, they tried to rig the state election in Kansas to allow slavery, they nearly killed a Senator for speaking out against slavery. They trod all over personal liberty laws in Northern states. They used the federal marshalls to arrest runaway or suspected runaway slaves and send them back to slavery without a trial. They tried to use the federal government to invade Cuba in order to expand slavery. They invaded Mexico to expand slavery.

Here is what they said about their decision to secede.

Mississippi: "Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery."

South Carolina's secession document makes it very clear that they are seceding over slavery.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: FightingDevilTiger
I disag

Disagree, not with the slavery part, but a lot of monuments are to recognize leaders of men who did die for what they thought was right for the country in that era. It just a part of our history, and it can't be erased.
Move them to museums then. We're celebrating them by having them in public. Or do you think we should put up statues to Benedict Arnold, Vietnam draft dodgers, etc. They did what they thought was right for their country. Should the Germans put up statues of Nazis? Should the Russians put up statues of Stalin and Lenin?
 
Move them to museums then. We're celebrating them by having them in public. Or do you think we should put up statues to Benedict Arnold, Vietnam draft dodgers, etc. They did what they thought was right for their country. Should the Germans put up statues of Nazis? Should the Russians put up statues of Stalin and Lenin?
You're just going to go in circles here with this crowd. The very fact that you're educated on this more than most people makes you even less credible.
 
Move them to museums then. We're celebrating them by having them in public. Or do you think we should put up statues to Benedict Arnold, Vietnam draft dodgers, etc. They did what they thought was right for their country. Should the Germans put up statues of Nazis? Should the Russians put up statues of Stalin and Lenin?

No, museums would be fine. I'm just against erasing history like it didn't happen. If we erased all history, then let's all find a cave and start the whole thing over because we wouldn't know shit.
 
No, museums would be fine. I'm just against erasing history like it didn't happen. If we erased all history, then let's all find a cave and start the whole thing over because we wouldn't know shit.
Removing confederate monuments ain't erasing history. You can go read about them in a museum or plaque somewhere. Those statues were put up to celebrate them. Screw 'em. They betrayed our country and fought to keep their fellow man as property and chattel.
 
When you change the name of a military base or take down a confederate statue you are not erasing history. You are simply not honoring those who are not deserving of honor. Naming us military bases for confederate generals is like naming them for Nazi generals. How does the Hermann Goring airbase sound?
That sir, would be your opinion. Those statues were erected in a different era. Different times. You dishonor those that lived and died in a different time that dictated war. In war you have cowards and heros. You don't honor cowards. You being enlightened and hindsight being what it is.
 
Speaking as a former history grad student (left when I was at the ABD phase), the Confederates were traitors to our country, who fought solely to preserve their "right" to hold other people in perpetual bondage as property. After the war, many of them tried to bring back slavery in all but name (black codes) and launched domestic terror campaigns to end Reconstruction ("Redemption"). They got off too leniently. A lot of Confederate monuments were erected during the 1910s as a counter to early civil rights pushes and to try to keep African Americans in their place. You see it crop up again in the 50s and 60s after Brown v Board. After segregation is declared unconstitutional, you see Georgia put the confederate flag back in their state flag, and stuff like that. Flying the confederate flag and keeping confederate monuments up is a disgrace to our country and the men who fought and died to preserve it.
Ironic OP talks about history without know American history.
 
That sir, would be your opinion. Those statues were erected in a different era. Different times. You dishonor those that lived and died in a different time that dictated war. In war you have cowards and heros. You don't honor cowards. You being enlightened and hindsight being what it is.
Those statues were erected to honor men who were traitors to their country and who fought to keep African Americans enslaved.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT