This is what emboldened white supremacists look like
- Thread starter annabenedetti
- Start date
How about the people of New Orleans would rather have a better, nobler association? Sounds good to me. And removing Swastikas and Nazi emblems in Germany didn't lead to anyone forgetting the Third Reich, but it took any semblance of honor from the association.
I'm actually fine with racist caricatures being removed by the organizations that inherit them. Good reason? They're racist caricatures.
So you're okay with pornography on the stands for anyone passing by to see and purchase? Because if you're not you're fine with censorship.
I'm fine with racist values being marginalized in any society.
No one's rights were removed with the statues. And if someone sent you a gift that personally offended you would you proudly display it at the entrance of your house? Neither will the good people of New Orleans.
You'll excuse me I hope, but why on earth should that be the standard? If you bought a business that had the painting of a naked lady on the outside of it because it once was a brothel (that part of town having undergone a gentrification) should you be required to leave it on your new home for a church?
Neither should the good people of New Orleans.
Has anyone suggested they wouldn't be?
Sure. And as a part of a larger historical set out, like Gettysburgh.
Really? I'd argue you should be. Lee was a man of renowned character who recognized the evil he fought to preserve. Grant, a more notably flawed character fought to end it and to preserve the Union. I'll take flawed in the service of the good over gentlemanly in the service of an evil any day of the week.
To my mind that's like suggesting you can't have a statue of MLK, Jr. without a statue of a Grand Klan Wizard.
No, it wasn't. Other issues were tied to slavery, but the war was all about that inhuman and indecent practice. I've set out the declarations on the point by most of the states that rebelled. I've noted the headlines and stump speeches. It's not even close to arguable, Lon.
I don't really care if the Nazis believed in what they did to the Jews. I don't think it elevates their conduct a whit.
Neither do the good people of New Orleans.
If you believed that you'd be fine with porn on street corners and over the public airwaves of major networks. You'd be fine with blasphemy around here. I don't believe you are, Lon. Censorship is like a gun. It depends on how you use it.
The dinosaurs who support romanticizing that lamentable chapter will pass into a clearer, more objective treatment of history and no one will forget the real lesson of that war and how many died to teach it to us.
It's a lesson understood by more and more, and one now championed by those same good people.
Lon
Well-known member
Of course there is a force else we'd have it (I own it, had to purchase out of country, beautiful show). I just read they are considering repealing the decision.
glorydaz
Well-known member
Why in the world would you want that torn down?
I guess we should tear down the battlefield memorials, too. The Gettysburg museum....
Heck, let's not ever show Gone with the Wind. Let's not even mention slavery. Let's get rid of all those books in the libraries. Purge the earth of all historical evidence and put up rainbow flags across this land. :doh:
Blows the mind!
Our nation has way too many wussy little sheep that don't have the good sense to just stand up and say, "This is frivolous and a huge waste of taxpayer money. Just stop the madness already!"
thats the truth
And make a law that everybody has to hold hands and drink a Coke while they are singing We Are The World.
In response to Tam's 8% comment...
That said, I have no idea where she's getting her numbers.
Here are a few more fun facts. In 1860, 47% of the population of the South was slave.
One third of Southern families owned slaves (that's more than 8% for the math challenged). So if you thin a thing out you can get one number. But if you look at it where it mattered, another.
Number of slave owners in the South: 385,000. 50% of slave owners had fewer than five.
How profitable was the institution? Though the South had only 30% of the U.S. free population it had 60% of the wealthiest men among its number.
The war was all about slavery. Most people in the South approved and one in three participated in the process directly. Many more indirectly.
As to the myths being spread of late, again, using the History Channel:
And so on.
That said, I have no idea where she's getting her numbers.
Here are a few more fun facts. In 1860, 47% of the population of the South was slave.
One third of Southern families owned slaves (that's more than 8% for the math challenged). So if you thin a thing out you can get one number. But if you look at it where it mattered, another.
Number of slave owners in the South: 385,000. 50% of slave owners had fewer than five.
How profitable was the institution? Though the South had only 30% of the U.S. free population it had 60% of the wealthiest men among its number.
The war was all about slavery. Most people in the South approved and one in three participated in the process directly. Many more indirectly.
As to the myths being spread of late, again, using the History Channel:
Myth #2: The South seceded from the Union over the issue of states’ rights, not slavery.
This myth, that the Civil War wasn’t fundamentally a conflict over slavery, would have been a surprise to the original founders of the Confederacy. In the official declaration of the causes of their secession in December 1860, South Carolina’s delegates cited “an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery.” According to them, the Northern interference with the return of fugitive slaves was violating their constitutional obligations; they also complained that some states in New England tolerated abolitionist societies and allowed black men to vote.
Myth #3: Only a small percentage of Southerners owned slaves.
Closely related to Myth #2, the idea that the vast majority of Confederate soldiers were men of modest means rather than large plantation owners is usually used to reinforce the contention that the South wouldn’t have gone to war to protect slavery. The 1860 census shows that in the states that would soon secede from the Union, an average of more than 32 percent of white families owned slaves. Some states had far more slave owners (46 percent in South Carolina, 49 percent in Mississippi) while some had far less (20 percent in Arkansas).
But as Jamelle Bouie and Rebecca Onion point out in Slate, the percentages don’t fully express the extent to which the antebellum South was a slave society, built on a foundation of slavery. Many of those white families who couldn’t afford slaves aspired to, as a symbol of wealth and prosperity. In addition, the essential ideology of white supremacy that served as a rationale for slavery, made it extremely difficult—and terrifying—for white Southerners to imagine life alongside a black majority population that was not in bondage. In this way, many non-slave-owning Confederates went to war to protect not only slavery, but to preserve the foundation of the only way of life they knew.
Myth #3: Only a small percentage of Southerners owned slaves.
Closely related to Myth #2, the idea that the vast majority of Confederate soldiers were men of modest means rather than large plantation owners is usually used to reinforce the contention that the South wouldn’t have gone to war to protect slavery. The 1860 census shows that in the states that would soon secede from the Union, an average of more than 32 percent of white families owned slaves. Some states had far more slave owners (46 percent in South Carolina, 49 percent in Mississippi) while some had far less (20 percent in Arkansas).
But as Jamelle Bouie and Rebecca Onion point out in Slate, the percentages don’t fully express the extent to which the antebellum South was a slave society, built on a foundation of slavery. Many of those white families who couldn’t afford slaves aspired to, as a symbol of wealth and prosperity. In addition, the essential ideology of white supremacy that served as a rationale for slavery, made it extremely difficult—and terrifying—for white Southerners to imagine life alongside a black majority population that was not in bondage. In this way, many non-slave-owning Confederates went to war to protect not only slavery, but to preserve the foundation of the only way of life they knew.
And so on.
Regarding ‘Song of the South’ – The Film That Disney Doesn’t Want You to See
The force is political correctness, which is rampant these days. I have a bridge to sell right now, for anyone who doesn't believe it.
drbrumley
Well-known member
Think I am going to throw up
Foxfire
Well-known member
I don't want it torn down at all. It's NOT in the U.S..
It is exactly where it should be.
In another country to which their loyalty is more appropriate and country to which they fled when they were defeated here.
I would be quite happy to see confederate war memorials in the same context.
WizardofOz
New member
It goes both ways though, doesn't it? :think:
The point is that no one forced Disney to stop making copies of 'Song of the South'.
Do you dare venture outside of your home?
Otherwise, what a load of yet more paranoid bunk.
:freak:
lain:
Bear in mind there's still some nuts who denied the Holocaust ever happened. But they were all 'liberals'...
Oh wait, what?
:freak:
I wasn't talking about most, or how many. I was only wondering what type of statues a conservative might go after. Is there an equivalent to the Confederacy monuments?
Perceived public opinion is a kind of force, it causes people to do all kinds of things they wouldnt.
Well, congrats on the spelling if not the content.
Since i would do no such thing, do tell how i would answer that.