Princess of Tap

Jim Crow Confederate Monuments Go Down in America

557 posts in this topic

In the wake of the mass murders of black churchgoers in South Carolina, New Orleans has decided to tear down several Confederate monuments, which have historically been rallying points for the Ku Klux Klan and the concept of white supremacy.

 

 

Source: NBC Nightly News with Lester Holt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who in the hell is Charles Didier Dreux?

 

And why doesn't he have arms? :lol:

 

DSCF3124.jpg

 

 

He looks like General Zod.

 

170287d7b3489b21b3365779ced668cc.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to Mitch Landrieu, the Mayor of New Orleans, a statue of Robert E. Lee will be the next Confederate Monument to go. The Mayor said Gen. Lee had nothing to do with New Orleans.

 

Landrieu explained there was nothing patriotic about the Confederacy and that it was all about the destruction of the United States. So he has no qualms about getting rid of these Confederate monuments, as the city was continuing its reconstruction after Hurricane Katrina.

 

Source: MSNBC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Down goes Bobby Lee. I've always thought the War Between the

States was the stupidest option to try to disguise what was

plainly a civil war. It sounds as if every state was fighting another

one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Down goes Bobby Lee. I've always thought the War Between the

States was the stupidest option to try to disguise what was

plainly a civil war. It sounds as if every state was fighting another

one.

It was just a matter of a few Insurrectionist states trying to destroy the Union and obliterate the Constitution. That's the political take--

 

But we were always taught in school that the Antebellum Plantation South just wanted to live in the feudal past--holding back the progressive industrialized North, which was the future of the whole country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will be interesting to see what they do about Gen PGT Beauregard's statue. He was from NO and returned there after the war.

The Civil War, War of Northern Aggression, War Between the States or whatever you want to call it was far more complex than just slavery.  Although slavery was the major conflict and the spark that started it.

If you go back to Colonial American history, you will find that the South and the North never really got along all that well.  In addition, there was always a conflict over which was superior, the states or the central government and what the Constitution really meant.  It would take a war to resolve that issue. As the elections since 2010 show, issue still not totally resolved.

 

As for states fighting each other, we still are.  Now they do it with "economic incentives."

One of the things many people do not understand, especially those from other nations, is that our system of states is not like anything else.  Prior to the Civil War, that was especially true.

Shelby Foote put it very well.  Before the Civil War, we were These United States and after the war, we are The United States.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shelby Foote put it very well.  Before the Civil War, we were These United States and after the war, we are The United States.

Shelby Foote put it another way that i think is more to the point when he said...Before the Civil War we referred to the United States as "The United States Are".After the war we became the "United States Is"....We went from being an "Are" to an "Is"...Shelby Foote.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was just a matter of a few Insurrectionist states trying to destroy the Union and obliterate the Constitution. That's the political take--

 

But we were always taught in school that the Antebellum Plantation South just wanted to live in the feudal past--holding back the progressive industrialized North, which was the future of the whole country.

 

and modern American progressivism wishes to trash, defame, ridicule and generally demonize our country's rich Judeo-Christian traditions and history in the name of godless amoral secularism which denies that anything of enduring value or worth ever has come out of our past....

 

there is no widespread concensus of support for doing that...there never has been.

 

progressivism denies the intrinsic essentiality of anything from America's past. good OR bad.

 

the true folly of progressivism is believing that the liberal brand of saccharin lets-not-offend-anybody feel-goodism can exist in a vacuum.

 

they fear the remembrance of judeo-christian foundations of morality and it's associated civilizations so much the only thing that can lend them comfort is a human slate wiped clean of all past histories

 

what are they so afraid of?..of being disagreed with?

 

are they adults willing to tolerate dessent or are they scared children?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why is it dumb to go after confederate monuments?

 

they call them symbols of racism. bull.

 

it's an attack against white southern people in lieu of the long dead white antebellum populace.

 

the sins of the fathers visited upon the sons? the black civil rights leaders?...is that their calling???

 

and some people hafta wonder why we have a racial divide in this country.

 

it just got fed for 8 years by a real smooth-talking schtootz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and modern American progressivism wishes to trash, defame, ridicule and generally demonize our country's rich Judeo-Christian traditions and history in the name of godless amoral secularism which denies that anything of enduring value or worth ever has come out of our past....

 

 

There ya go again with your "rich Judeo-Christian tradition" nonsense.  There never WAS a  Judeo-Christian "tradition" as many different faiths and religious doctrines were followed by the people who came here and helped make this nation great.  And WHICH so-called "Judeo-Christian" morality are you TALKING about that relates to the topic at hand?

 

Slavery?

 

The rememberance and REVERENCE of slavery?

 

Misogyny?

 

Look, as much as I agree that the civil war and it's major players are a part of this nation's history,it's what these people represented OUTSIDE the issue of slavery that I take issue with in regards to erecting statues of them or flying the "stars and bars".

 

The Confederacy went to war with what was basically the United States of America and it's constitution.

 

They selected their OWN president and formed their own legislature.

 

Formed their own military.

 

Printed their own sort of constituton and created their own currency.

 

And in thus declaring war on the Union, actually declared war on The United States and became this country's ENEMY.

 

Now, we DON'T go around hoisting NAZI flags with the tepid excuse of "it's part of our HISTORY", do we?

 

Or display statues of Yamamoto or Mussolini EITHER, right?

 

So, WHAT makes those old SOUTHERN traitors so special?

 

And so why NOT put up a statues of NIKITA KRUSHCHEV or JOSEPH STALIN as well?

 

 

Sepiatone

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having relatives in Japan I may have a slightly different take on these monuments.   While most of those relatives believe Japan was on the wrong side of history for attacking the USA they still want to honor their ancestors that fought for their country.

 

Of course the US conflict was a civil war and those that fought for the South traitors,  they were pardoned (including Davis).    

 

I would leave their monuments up as a teaching lesson.   There are a lot of them depending how on one views them.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was just a matter of a few Insurrectionist states trying to destroy the Union and obliterate the Constitution. That's the political take--

 

But we were always taught in school that the Antebellum Plantation South just wanted to live in the feudal past--holding back the progressive industrialized North, which was the future of the whole country.

If someone was already familiar with the American Civil War, they might

see how that alternative name might fit a little, but if they knew nothing

about the American Civil War, that alternative name would just be

baffling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having relatives in Japan I may have a slightly different take on these monuments. While most of those relatives believe Japan was on the wrong side of history for attacking the USA they still want to honor their ancestors that fought for their country.

 

Of course the US conflict was a civil war and those that fought for the South traitors, they were pardoned (including Davis).

 

I would leave their monuments up as a teaching lesson. There are a lot of them depending how on one views them.

 

 

James - - The difference is the Japanese are Japanese in Japan and that's their country--they have a right to feel anyway they want to in their own country and to put up whatever monuments, memorials they want to put up.

 

 

And the enemy was the United States-- the allies--we were foreigners.

 

 

A civil war is a little bit of a different kind of situation. The southern insurrectionists attacked our country and tried to destroy it, yet

they were supposed to be part of our country.

 

At the same time if we show respect for people who try to destroy us, then at the same time we're showing a lack of respect for the Americans people and our own Union.

 

Additionally the Confederacy mindset cannot be separated from the approval of slavery and white supremacy, which in turn shows a lack of respect for a large demographic of our population who are African American and descended from our slaves.

 

I think it's late in the day to be discussing why we should take down any kind of Monument to the Confederacy.

 

Those who want to keep them do not think that it's a lost cause-- but that was always the problem with the Confederate mindset--always living in the past and trying to bring the past back.

 

It will never be 1881 again--when the cocksure insurrectionists attacked Fort Sumter--

 

just as it will never be 1957 again when Southern whites in Little Rock, Arkansas displayed so much hatred and violence on national TV for the world to see when the federal government demanded that these Southerners desegregate their public schools.

 

The past is past--some people will just have to learn to live with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

James - - The difference is the Japanese are Japanese in Japan and that's their country--they have a right to feel anyway they want to in their own country and to put up whatever monuments, memorials they want to put up.

 

 

And the enemy was the United States-- the allies--we were foreigners.

 

 

A civil war is a little bit of a different kind of situation. The southern insurrectionists attacked our country and tried to destroy it, yet

they were supposed to be part of our country.

 

At the same time if we show respect for people who try to destroy us, then at the same time we're showing a lack of respect for the Americans people and our own Union.

 

Additionally the Confederacy mindset cannot be separated from the approval of slavery and white supremacy, which in turn shows a lack of respect for a large demographic of our population who are African American and descended from our slaves.

 

I think it's late in the day to be discussing why we should take down any kind of Monument to the Confederacy.

 

Those who want to keep them do not think that it's a lost cause-- but that was always the problem with the Confederate mineset--always living in the past and trying to bring the past back.

 

It will never be 1881 again--when the cocksure insurrectionists attacked Fort Sumter--

 

just as it will never be 1957 again when Southern whites in Little Rock, Arkansas displayed so much have so much hatred and violence on national TV for the world to see when the federal government demanded that these Southerners desegregate their public schools.

 

The past is past--some people will just have to learn to live with it.

 

The past is the past;  OK,  but isn't it you that are NOT willing to learn to live with it?

 

These monuments were built and created.   While I don't think they should have ever been built, they were.   That is part of US history as well as the war.    Anyone that wants them to be removed is NOT willing to "live with it".

 

Leaving them up will be a reminder how many Southerners felt when these monuments were created.    That will help remind people that racism existed long after the war and still does today.   THAT was one of the lessons that can be learned by leaving them in place. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

00bde3522c801e2ac9c6f9077a067bfc_bigger.

The Federalist‏Verified account @FDRLST 44m44 minutes ago

 

New Orleans Is Wrong To Remove Its Confederate Monuments, via @johnddavidson

BeauregardStatueSideOct08-998x744.jpg

http://thefederalist.com/2017/04/25/new-orleans-wrong-remove-confederate-monuments/

There ya go again with your "rich Judeo-Christian tradition" nonsense. There never WAS a Judeo-Christian "tradition" as many different faiths and religious doctrines were followed by the people who came here and helped make this nation great. And WHICH so-called "Judeo-Christian" morality are you TALKING about that relates to the topic at hand?

 

Slavery?

 

The rememberance and REVERENCE of slavery?

 

Misogyny?

 

Look, as much as I agree that the civil war and it's major players are a part of this nation's history,it's what these people represented OUTSIDE the issue of slavery that I take issue with in regards to erecting statues of them or flying the "stars and bars".

 

The Confederacy went to war with what was basically the United States of America and it's constitution.

 

They selected their OWN president and formed their own legislature.

 

Formed their own military.

 

Printed their own sort of constituton and created their own currency.

 

And in thus declaring war on the Union, actually declared war on The United States and became this country's ENEMY.

 

Now, we DON'T go around hoisting NAZI flags with the tepid excuse of "it's part of our HISTORY", do we?

 

Or display statues of Yamamoto or Mussolini EITHER, right?

 

So, WHAT makes those old SOUTHERN traitors so special?

 

And so why NOT put up a statues of NIKITA KRUSHCHEV or JOSEPH STALIN as well?

 

 

Sepiatone

Well said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

00bde3522c801e2ac9c6f9077a067bfc_bigger.

The Federalist‏Verified account @FDRLST 44m44 minutes ago

 

New Orleans Is Wrong To Remove Its Confederate Monuments, via @johnddavidson

BeauregardStatueSideOct08-998x744.jpg

http://thefederalist.com/2017/04/25/new-orleans-wrong-remove-confederate-monuments/

James - - The difference is the Japanese are Japanese in Japan and that's their country--they have a right to feel anyway they want to in their own country and to put up whatever monuments, memorials they want to put up.

 

 

And the enemy was the United States-- the allies--we were foreigners.

 

 

A civil war is a little bit of a different kind of situation. The southern insurrectionists attacked our country and tried to destroy it, yet

they were supposed to be part of our country.

 

At the same time if we show respect for people who try to destroy us, then at the same time we're showing a lack of respect for the Americans people and our own Union.

 

Additionally the Confederacy mindset cannot be separated from the approval of slavery and white supremacy, which in turn shows a lack of respect for a large demographic of our population who are African American and descended from our slaves.

 

I think it's late in the day to be discussing why we should take down any kind of Monument to the Confederacy.

 

Those who want to keep them do not think that it's a lost cause-- but that was always the problem with the Confederate mindset--always living in the past and trying to bring the past back.

 

It will never be 1881 again--when the cocksure insurrectionists attacked Fort Sumter--

 

just as it will never be 1957 again when Southern whites in Little Rock, Arkansas displayed so much hatred and violence on national TV for the world to see when the federal government demanded that these Southerners desegregate their public schools.

 

The past is past--some people will just have to learn to live with it.

 

 

I say the past is past and I don't think we should bring slavery back either--

 

I think black Americans are equal to white Americans, but these statues cry out with white supremacy and that's another reason I'm against them.

 

As Mayor Landrieu said the Confederate statues are a rallying point for the Ku Klux Klan.

 

The Mayor also said that there's already been violence in New Orleans in relationship to this situation, but the city is going to continue and not be intimidated by any kind of domestic terrorism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It will never be 1881 again--when the cocksure insurrectionists attacked Fort Sumter--

 

 

Which led directly to then-President Garfield's assassination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but just maybe white southerners doan buy that it's just about tearing down the monuments of racism's past.

 

maybe they think it's just about sticking it to southern whites.

 

right or wrong, that's just what a lot of white southerners are thinking.

 

they might ask a black clergyman how removing a 100 year old monument to stonewall jackson is going to affect urban african-americans in any tangible real world way.

 

of course the real reason is that liberalism is morally and ethically bankrupt. all they ever really had was a lot of hate-inducing symbolism.

 

tearing down confederate statuary feeds symbolism but it doan feed much of anything else and the left will never wanna touch on any of that because then they hafta talk about real world things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There ya go again with your "rich Judeo-Christian tradition" nonsense.  There never WAS a  Judeo-Christian "tradition" as many different faiths and religious doctrines were followed by the people who came here and helped make this nation great.  And WHICH so-called "Judeo-Christian" morality are you TALKING about that relates to the topic at hand?

 

Slavery?

 

The rememberance and REVERENCE of slavery?

 

Misogyny?

 

Look, as much as I agree that the civil war and it's major players are a part of this nation's history,it's what these people represented OUTSIDE the issue of slavery that I take issue with in regards to erecting statues of them or flying the "stars and bars".

 

The Confederacy went to war with what was basically the United States of America and it's constitution.

 

They selected their OWN president and formed their own legislature.

 

Formed their own military.

 

Printed their own sort of constituton and created their own currency.

 

And in thus declaring war on the Union, actually declared war on The United States and became this country's ENEMY.

 

So, WHAT makes those old SOUTHERN traitors so special?

 

 

Sepiatone

Obviously you never took a real course in American history.  Your explanation of events is totally incorrect.  By your standards, the British should reject everything American and refuse to even deal with America or its citizens.

Incidentally, aren't you citing a commedian's comments from three years ago?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

right or wrong, that's just what a lot of white southerners are thinking.

 

Neither I, nor anyone else, have to respect your ignorance. If you take something the wrong way because you misunderstand it, that would be your problem.

 

As for the statuary, if it's really about honoring history, then they should do what was done in my neighboring counties: move the offensive items to the nearest history museum. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The past is the past;  OK,  but isn't it you that are NOT willing to learn to live with it?

 

These monuments were built and created.   While I don't think they should have ever been built, they were.   That is part of US history as well as the war.    Anyone that wants them to be removed is NOT willing to "live with it".

 

Leaving them up will be a reminder how many Southerners felt when these monuments were created.    That will help remind people that racism existed long after the war and still does today.   THAT was one of the lessons that can be learned by leaving them in place. 

Interestingly Greenwood SC is in a conflict over something similar.  Might have some facts incorrect. But basically the VFW(?) erected a monument many years ago to those who died in WW  II with whites listed on one side and negroes or colored on another. It is located on city property.  The current VFW(?) has purchased a new marker listing all of the deceased in one place without race. The city council agreed to replace the two old markers with the one new one.

But, S.C. has a state law that no monument of any kind can be altered, removed, etc. without 2/3's vote of the state legislature. This was part of deal to get the Confederate battle flag off the top of the state house itself several years ago, not the recent controversy.

So far, the legislature has refused to approve the change.

MY Opinon:  Leave the markers as they are as a reminder to present and future generations of how blacks were discriminated against as recently as the period after WW  II.

Monuments to the past are complicated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was just a matter of a few Insurrectionist states trying to destroy the Union and obliterate the Constitution. That's the political take--

 

But we were always taught in school that the Antebellum Plantation South just wanted to live in the feudal past--holding back the progressive industrialized North, which was the future of the whole country.

Obviously your schools lacked quality US History courses or instructors.  It was far, far, far more complicated than that.

Why do you think the Civil War is still one of the most researched, written about and discussed episodes in US History?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously your schools lacked quality US History courses or instructors. It was far, far, far more complicated than that.

Why do you think the Civil War is still one of the most researched, written about and discussed episodes in US History?

Cid--

 

We were really just spending a lot of time reenacting Quantrill's Raid and following in the footsteps of our hero John Brown, like good Jayhawkers should. LOL

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

New Members:

Register Here

Learn more about the new message boards:

FAQ

Having problems?

Contact Us