Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Register Log in

Trump



Simster

Simster

"the man's an arse"
Jul 7, 2003
54,208
Surrey
Franky, half the statues in the world should be pulled down and replaced with WOMEN. And this shouldn't be too difficult in America, seeing as half of them stood for values that were dubious centuries ago, never mind in the modern world.
 




Mellotron

Mellotron

I've asked for soup
Jul 2, 2008
31,849
Brighton
Simster said:
Franky, half the statues in the world should be pulled down and replaced with WOMEN. And this shouldn't be too difficult in America, seeing as half of them stood for values that were dubious centuries ago, never mind in the modern world.
Click to expand...

I don't think getting women to stand still is the answer.
 






Stat Brother

Stat Brother

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 11, 2003
73,735
West west west Sussex
I love comments like these:-

[tweet]898755760720560129[/tweet]


It's good to be reminded how crazy this whole situation is, we need to pay attention, those of us that live will be asked lots of questions beginning with:-

"What happened"
 




C

cunning fergus

Well-known member
Jan 18, 2009
4,747
midnight_rendezvous said:
'White washing' history? For goodness sakes we are talking about the removal of statues. Statues moreover of traitors whose said treason was in defense of slavery. If those who object are that concerned they could always, I don't know, open a book?
Click to expand...


This feels very reactionary to me, Robert E Lee was invited to fight for the Union but didn't as at that point the state he was from (Virginia)had not committed to a side, when it did democratically declare for the confederacy he fought for Virginia first, the confederacy second. He was no traitor.

No doubt many on the side of the confederacy fought to maintain slavery, however there was a significant dimension to the causes of the conflict which concerned individual states freedom.......a kind of pre-curser to Brexit if you will.

If of course you are just being binary and looking to rail at pro slavers, then I would expect the French to be tearing down memorials to Napoleon who sent 50,000 troops to Haiti to put down a successful rebellion by dlaves there.....so much for the declaration of the rights of man, that only worked if you were blanc.

Not that the UK's shit doesn't stink either, however on another thread there are statements by the dumb on the causes of the Boer war, and yet none of the contributors have recognised that a major factor was the revulsion the British had for the way the Boers treated the indigenous peoples.

The British took control of the cape territory following the defeat of Napoleon, the Dutch having been there in much larger numbers for a couple of hundred of years before. They were no angels in contemporary values but for the indigenous blacks in the cape they were compared to the Afrikaans.
 


midnight_rendezvous

midnight_rendezvous

Well-known member
Aug 10, 2012
3,737
The Black Country
cunning fergus said:
This feels very reactionary to me, Robert E Lee was invited to fight for the Union but didn't as at that point the state he was from (Virginia)had not committed to a side, when it did democratically declare for the confederacy he fought for Virginia first, the confederacy second. He was no traitor.

No doubt many on the side of the confederacy fought to maintain slavery, however there was a significant dimension to the causes of the conflict which concerned individual states freedom.......a kind of pre-curser to Brexit if you will.

If of course you are just being binary and looking to rail at pro slavers, then I would expect the French to be tearing down memorials to Napoleon who sent 50,000 troops to Haiti to put down a successful rebellion by dlaves there.....so much for the declaration of the rights of man, that only worked if you were blanc.

Not that the UK's shit doesn't stink either, however on another thread there are statements by the dumb on the causes of the Boer war, and yet none of the contributors have recognised that a major factor was the revulsion the British had for the way the Boers treated the indigenous peoples.

The British took control of the cape territory following the defeat of Napoleon, the Dutch having been there in much larger numbers for a couple of hundred of years before. They were no angels in contemporary values but for the indigenous blacks in the cape they were compared to the Afrikaans.
Click to expand...


Lee should be recalled as a slave owner who would not give them up. He should be remembered as one who felt so keenly about slavery that he renounced his commission in the U.S. Army and enlisted in the Confederate one, whose purpose was to keep emancipation at bay , states' rights, and political liberty for whites. He was not the creature of crushing social and political pressure who had little choice but to pick his state over his country. In fact, various members of his own family, and 40% of Virginia officers, stuck with the Union.
 


C

cunning fergus

Well-known member
Jan 18, 2009
4,747
midnight_rendezvous said:
Lee should be recalled as a slave owner who would not give them up. He should be remembered as one who felt so keenly about slavery that he renounced his commission in the U.S. Army and enlisted in the Confederate one, whose purpose was to keep emancipation at bay , states' rights, and political liberty for whites. He was not the creature of crushing social and political pressure who had little choice but to pick his state over his country. In fact, various members of his own family, and 40% of Virginia officers, stuck with the Union.
Click to expand...


It appears you are pushing the binary argument then that all slave owners were evil, accordingly statues of Washington and Jefferson should come down too?

The more nuanced assessment of Lee was that he aligned himself with the fortunes of Virginia, which voted against ceding from the Union, 2-1 until Lincoln essentially declared war on the southern states that had ceded, where upon the state of Virginia as a point of principle in the face of this aggression then voted 2-1 to cede.

For those in control of Virginia slavery was therefore a secondary point, it was about the power of the state to determine its future as a sovereign state not controlled by a federal union.

You may see this as treachery and that those who supported it as traitors but then I would wager you would feel the same way about Brexit?

Plus ca change.
 




Tyrone Biggums

Tyrone Biggums

Well-known member
Jun 25, 2006
13,498
Geelong, Australia
cunning fergus said:
This feels very reactionary to me, Robert E Lee was invited to fight for the Union but didn't as at that point the state he was from (Virginia)had not committed to a side, when it did democratically declare for the confederacy he fought for Virginia first, the confederacy second. He was no traitor.

No doubt many on the side of the confederacy fought to maintain slavery, however there was a significant dimension to the causes of the conflict which concerned individual states freedom.......a kind of pre-curser to Brexit if you will.

If of course you are just being binary and looking to rail at pro slavers, then I would expect the French to be tearing down memorials to Napoleon who sent 50,000 troops to Haiti to put down a successful rebellion by dlaves there.....so much for the declaration of the rights of man, that only worked if you were blanc.

Not that the UK's shit doesn't stink either, however on another thread there are statements by the dumb on the causes of the Boer war, and yet none of the contributors have recognised that a major factor was the revulsion the British had for the way the Boers treated the indigenous peoples.

The British took control of the cape territory following the defeat of Napoleon, the Dutch having been there in much larger numbers for a couple of hundred of years before. They were no angels in contemporary values but for the indigenous blacks in the cape they were compared to the Afrikaans.
Click to expand...

How many Statues of Charles II still stand in the UK? Massive slave trader he was.
 




midnight_rendezvous

midnight_rendezvous

Well-known member
Aug 10, 2012
3,737
The Black Country
cunning fergus said:
It appears you are pushing the binary argument then that all slave owners were evil, accordingly statues of Washington and Jefferson should come down too?

The more nuanced assessment of Lee was that he aligned himself with the fortunes of Virginia, which voted against ceding from the Union, 2-1 until Lincoln essentially declared war on the southern states that had ceded, where upon the state of Virginia as a point of principle in the face of this aggression then voted 2-1 to cede.

For those in control of Virginia slavery was therefore a secondary point, it was about the power of the state to determine its future as a sovereign state not controlled by a federal union.

You may see this as treachery and that those who supported it as traitors but then I would wager you would feel the same way about Brexit?

Plus ca change.
Click to expand...

The institution of slavery is evil and to fight for continuing existence is, and was, morally reprehensible. To say the view of Lee as a man morally obliged to choose state over his country is up for debate. And the idea that states fought to make their own laws than for the federal government to do it, is also up for debate. If you look at the secession bills each seceding state passed, they actually opposed states' rights. For example, southern slave states were upset that Maine passed a law making it legal for black peoples to vote there. They were upset that New York passed a law saying it was illegal to bring slaves there from another state. In each succession bill, each southern state explicitly stated they were quitting because they want to keep slavery.
 




C

cunning fergus

Well-known member
Jan 18, 2009
4,747
midnight_rendezvous said:
The institution of slavery is evil and to fight for continuing existence is, and was, morally reprehensible. To say the view of Lee as a man morally obliged to choose state over his country is up for debate. And the idea that states fought to make their own laws than for the federal government to do it, is also up for debate. If you look at the secession bills each seceding state passed, they actually opposed states' rights. For example, southern slave states were upset that Maine passed a law making it legal for black peoples to vote there. They were upset that New York passed a law saying it was illegal to bring slaves there from another state. In each succession bill, each southern state explicitly stated they were quitting because they want to keep slavery.
Click to expand...


Of course there are many aspects of this situation that are open to debate, constantly employing simplistic pious platitudes to the cause of the US civil war and who took part is shutting the debate down, which is of course exactly how debate is conducted in democracies these days.

You may well be right about the succession bills, but I am pretty sure Virginia never went to war for the confederacy because they agreed with slavery per se, they believed it was for states themselves to determine.

That position may still be morally reprehensible today but many Virginians considered their state to be sovereign and not the US federal government.

Lee would have fought for the Union had it not effectively declared war on other southern states that had already ceded, which is what drew Virginia (an old state with its own constitution) into conflict with the federal government.

The destruction of civil war statues in the US assumes all the confederates were evil racists, many were, but not all and certainly Virginians have the best argument in that debate.
 




Tyrone Biggums

Tyrone Biggums

Well-known member
Jun 25, 2006
13,498
Geelong, Australia
knocky1 said:
Looks like many anti-police agitators in Boston. Police are looking tough and smart.
Click to expand...

Boston Free Speech released a statement to the Guardian saying they would not offer a platform to racism or bigotry. “We denounce the politics of supremacy and violence,” the statement said. “We denounce the actions, activities, and tactics of the so-called Antifa movement. We denounce the normalization of political violence.”
Click to expand...

So they did and said exactly what Trump did. Pointed out both extreme sides are *****.
 










rogersix

rogersix

Well-known member
Jan 18, 2014
7,904
Tyrone Biggums said:
And if you open a book you'll find the Union Army was full of people no different to their Confederate counterparts.

Some were worse.

Gen. Philip Sheridan's statue stands before the Capitol Building in Albany NY and yet he was the man who famously said “The only good Indians I ever saw were dead.”.

Yet his statue stands in the heartland of the Democrats with not one single person there protesting its existence.

Once again, hypocrisy is thy name.
Click to expand...

just because you can't do everything, doesn't mean you should do nothing
 




carlzeiss

carlzeiss

Well-known member
May 19, 2009
5,851
Amazonia
rogersix said:
just because you can't do everything, doesn't mean you should do nothing
Click to expand...

How about the pyramids in Egypt .

All built by slave labour with zero health and safety considerations .

Isn't it time for these to be leveled and replaced by a more appropriate monument to commemorate those who lost their lives .
 


rogersix

rogersix

Well-known member
Jan 18, 2014
7,904
carlzeiss said:
How about the pyramids in Egypt .

All built by slave labour with zero health and safety considerations .

Isn't it time for these to be leveled and replaced by a more appropriate monument to commemorate those who lost their lives .
Click to expand...

you little scamp
 


You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here