Jump to content

Recommended Posts

So if the Confederacy won, everyone would be cool with statues of Union generals in certain parts of the country? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, MrBig said:

So if the Confederacy won, everyone would be cool with statues of Union generals in certain parts of the country? 

I imagine there would still be union general statues in states of the USA.  The confederates weren't looking to capture the north.  Who knows what the confederacy would look like now 150 years later.  They couldn't possibly still have slavery.  They would have also had to deal with loads of foreign power interference and insurrections.  

Edited by FondrenRoad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, MrBig said:

So if the Confederacy won, everyone would be cool with statues of Union generals in certain parts of the country? 

spacer.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

One could conceivably defend founding father slaveholders as a product of their time.  Some of the best thinking in the world at that time held that Africans were an inferior species that justified their slavery.  As opposed to the Confederates, who were defending an idea that was clearly past its time.

Of course, from a moral absolute standpoint, it was a repugnant idea and indefensible ab initio.

Let me separate Washington from Jefferson for a minute.  I think you can somewhat make that defense of Washington.  He was, after all, a Virginia farmer with little experience outside the slaveholding mid-Atlantic until the War.

Jefferson, however, was a man of the world.  He spent a considerable amount of time in Enlightenment France.  He was exposed to plenty of contrary opinion.

And beyond that, Jefferson was a notorious rapist of his slaves.  And that was considered immoral according to the standards of the day.  You need only look at some of the Federalist polemics against Jefferson to know that Jefferson's rape of his slaves was both (1) widely known, and (2) considered to be wrong.  So I don't think that whole "product of their time" thing really works for Jefferson.

There are times when it's real hard to say whether someone was a good man who did bad things or a bad man who did good things.  Thomas Jefferson really is one of those cases where it's impossible for me to make that separation (though I probably lead to him being a bad man who did good things).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

My brother is in Blazers. He told me one of his friends in Blazers wrote a 15-page paper to the interim UT president regarding statues of racist figures they want removed and buildings renamed on campus. Apparently several student orgs have signed on to the paper and it's supposed to be delivered next week.

There's also a change.org petition requesting similar changes. 

https://www.change.org/p/ut-austin-students-have-ut-austin-acknowledge-its-racist-history-and-vow-to-make-reparations

Quote
  • Rename the R.L.M building to separate UT Austin from the racist views that Robert Lee Moore held in regards to his support of scientific racism
  • Rename the T.S. Painter building to separate UT Austin from the segregational views that Theophilus Shickel Painter displayed in the States Supreme Court's 1950 Sweatt v. Painter case 
  • Rename relevant landmarks and buildings to separate UT Austin from the segregational views of the Littlefield Family
  • Rename relevant landmarks and buildings to separate UT Austin from the segregational views of James Hogg, the Texas governor who signed the first Jim Crow laws
  • Acknowledge the racist roots of “The Eyes of Texas” and its origins from a reoccurring minstrel show on campus through a formal statement to the student body
  • Increase department funding to ethnic studies programs to combat eurocentrism in education
  • Acknowledge the racially charged history of Round Up events (ie. racially-themed parties) by actively working to prevent discriminatory events from happening, and hold greek life organizations accountable for their actions at Round Up surrounding race issues
  • Hold greek life organizations more accountable for discriminatory actions that occur at rush and social events by increasing the scrutiny of greek life events by their overseeing councils

 

Edited by Bruh Man

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

Let me separate Washington from Jefferson for a minute.  I think you can somewhat make that defense of Washington.  He was, after all, a Virginia farmer with little experience outside the slaveholding mid-Atlantic until the War.

Jefferson, however, was a man of the world.  He spent a considerable amount of time in Enlightenment France.  He was exposed to plenty of contrary opinion.

And beyond that, Jefferson was a notorious rapist of his slaves.  And that was considered immoral according to the standards of the day.  You need only look at some of the Federalist polemics against Jefferson to know that Jefferson's rape of his slaves was both (1) widely known, and (2) considered to be wrong.  So I don't think that whole "product of their time" thing really works for Jefferson.

There are times when it's real hard to say whether someone was a good man who did bad things or a bad man who did good things.  Thomas Jefferson really is one of those cases where it's impossible for me to make that separation (though I probably lead to him being a bad man who did good things).

Jefferson also admitted that slavery was wrong.

 

"There must doubtless be an unhappy influence on the manners of our people produced by the existence of slavery among us. The whole commerce between master and slave is a perpetual exercise of the most boisterous passions, the most unremitting despotism on the one part, and degrading submissions on the other."

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

Let me separate Washington from Jefferson for a minute.  I think you can somewhat make that defense of Washington.  He was, after all, a Virginia farmer with little experience outside the slaveholding mid-Atlantic until the War.

Jefferson, however, was a man of the world.  He spent a considerable amount of time in Enlightenment France.  He was exposed to plenty of contrary opinion.

And beyond that, Jefferson was a notorious rapist of his slaves.  And that was considered immoral according to the standards of the day.  You need only look at some of the Federalist polemics against Jefferson to know that Jefferson's rape of his slaves was both (1) widely known, and (2) considered to be wrong.  So I don't think that whole "product of their time" thing really works for Jefferson.

There are times when it's real hard to say whether someone was a good man who did bad things or a bad man who did good things.  Thomas Jefferson really is one of those cases where it's impossible for me to make that separation (though I probably lead to him being a bad man who did good things).

Jefferson did some really dirty stuff while he was Secretary of State in his efforts to sabotage Hamilton and the Federalists.  Things that are so disloyal that they could almost be called treasonous.  I have no problem saying he was a bad person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/8/2020 at 11:23 AM, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

So that's what Frank Rizzo looks like.  I've only heard him.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Question about Jeff Davis County, Fort Davis, and the Davis Mts: the actual fort was there before the Civil War but was later renamed and obviously so were the mountains.

Anyone know what the mountains and fort were called in the ante bellum years?

Edit: The post was originally named Fort Davis prior to the war as Jefferson Davis headed up the War Department as a tribute to him. That complicates renaming it.

https://tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/qbf15

Question still stands for what the mountains were called before the fort was established.

Edit 2: Limpia Mountains

There's no question about the county's name itself. That was undoubtedly done to honor his roll in being President of the Confederacy.

 

Edited by bolverk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alabama should put up a monument to the Union troops that burned the University down to the ground in it's place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, mdmost said:

I've never been to Monticello but I know at Mount Vernon they keep a permanent exhibit that shows the slaves quarters and don't shy away from Washington owning slaves. I think there is a way to separate the greatness of these men who founded a country with the horrific trade they did nothing to stop. 20 years ago, any of these conversations were considered blasphemous and the Founding Fathers were above reproach. 

I have a friend that works at Mount Vernon. As far as I can tell, he regularly gives presentations about the life of slaves at Mount Vernon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Great point, and a problem that the South has refused to face in many respects. It seems like few, or zero, confederate monuments want to acknowledge that slavery existed.  I can't imagine that Stone Mountain in GA wants to include a segment how Lee and Davis wanted to preserve slavery because of personal ideology and to keep the Southern economy afloat. That raises the next legitimate question on why these POS are being honored.

There are several plantations in Louisiana that incorporate the life and brutality of slavery in the plantation system and the guides are constantly being challenged by people on the tour. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, HenryJames said:

 

Color me surprised that this wasn't already the policy.

 

edit- @Longhorn_Fan68 had the same thought.  Seriously, wtf?

Edited by Sbbruin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ghost of LL said:

Let me separate Washington from Jefferson for a minute.  I think you can somewhat make that defense of Washington.  He was, after all, a Virginia farmer with little experience outside the slaveholding mid-Atlantic until the War.

Jefferson, however, was a man of the world.  He spent a considerable amount of time in Enlightenment France.  He was exposed to plenty of contrary opinion.

And beyond that, Jefferson was a notorious rapist of his slaves.  And that was considered immoral according to the standards of the day.  You need only look at some of the Federalist polemics against Jefferson to know that Jefferson's rape of his slaves was both (1) widely known, and (2) considered to be wrong.  So I don't think that whole "product of their time" thing really works for Jefferson.

There are times when it's real hard to say whether someone was a good man who did bad things or a bad man who did good things.  Thomas Jefferson really is one of those cases where it's impossible for me to make that separation (though I probably lead to him being a bad man who did good things).

I wasn't speaking in terms of specific founding fathers, but rather the class as a whole.  Jefferson did indeed do some fucked up repugnant shit.  I'm sure some others were nasty, too.  Some less so, apart from slaveholding.

France abolished slavery in 1794, significantly after the country was founded, and brought it right back in its colonies (really the only place applicable for  Europe anyway) ten years later.  While France in that era may have seemed like a bastion of progressive thought, I think there was so much rhetorical bomb-throwing among factions that it was difficult to distill a moral certainty from anything going on in France in the late 18th century.

While it seems abundantly clear 250 years later that slavery was a moral travesty, in the late 18th, it seems more like a sharp debate. A lot of abolitionists still considered blacks to be inferior, but that didn't justify slavery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

I wasn't speaking in terms of specific founding fathers, but rather the class as a whole.  Jefferson did indeed do some fucked up repugnant shit.  I'm sure some others were nasty, too.  Some less so, apart from slaveholding.

France abolished slavery in 1794, significantly after the country was founded, and brought it right back in its colonies (really the only place applicable for  Europe anyway) ten years later.  While France in that era may have seemed like a bastion of progressive thought, I think there was so much rhetorical bomb-throwing among factions that it was difficult to distill a moral certainty from anything going on in France in the late 18th century.

While it seems abundantly clear 250 years later that slavery was a moral travesty, in the late 18th, it seems more like a sharp debate. A lot of abolitionists still considered blacks to be inferior, but that didn't justify slavery.

Well, let me just ask you this--if raping one's slaves was not considered morally repugnant by society at the time, then why did Thomas Jefferson and his allies prosecute Azel Backus for criminal defamation when he alleged it (before having the charges dropped when it became clear that Backus could prove the veracity of the charge)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, MrBig said:

So if the Confederacy won, everyone would be cool with statues of Union generals in certain parts of the country? 

Something about the moral aspect of slavery escaping you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moscow moved many Soviet statues to Muzeon Park where they stood amongst modern sculptures memorializing the victims of Soviet oppression.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Have the trumpkins started with their "heritage" outrage yet?

Remember when they got so apoplectic about gay marriage they ensured it was the law of the land? That was awesome.

I look forward to this version.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Time for them to be in museums, with any graffiti on them left.

Or just toss them in a big pile outside of their respective state capitols as a reminder, kind of like the shoes at the Holocaust museum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The problem with creating historical heroes and “great men of history” is when they turn out to be not so great. Reconciling the greatness with the weakness can be difficult.

Of course, monuments to public service in support of the institution of slavery shouldn’t be so hard to reconcile. The popular sentiment of the day makes me suspect that there will be only pockets of listless resistance to taking down these statues. The culture is radically changing right in front of us.

Edited by Mole

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On Founding Fathers vs. Confederate Losers:  our 17th century founders have warts, but are the winners writing history and remain revered in spite of their warts.  The statues were erected out of a place of reverence that endures, even as we dig deeper and talk about into the uglier and more broken failings of these men.  The traitors of the Confederacy have statues not erected out of a sense of reverence, but out of a continued attempt to suppress the cause of freedom and equality they explicitly stood against.  
 

All of the Rob E Lee High Schools in Texas started after (and in response to) Brown v Board of Education.  These monuments are not about honoring the ideals of flawed men, but honoring the flawed ideals themselves. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a fan of Robert E. Lee.  For many years I had both he and Frederick Douglass hanging in my office as exemplars of human complexity and the power to forgive when hate was far easier an approach.  

That said, while I am happy to share a drink and explain that position, I am just as convinced that there is no place for a monument of any Confederate General in any public institution.  And the simple fact that it is painful to others is as good a reason as any to take them down.  So ultimately it will be history nerds left to discuss the nuances of the human spirit and psyche with other history nerds.

Bobby Lee was the one man most responsible for preventing the Confederacy from morphing into a bunch of armed vigilante bands for the decades after the war, and for that I am thankful.  That, and for being so reasonable about his yard being used as a burying ground for Union Troops.   Fucker should have accepted the command of the Union army when he was asked by Lincoln.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Only a matter of time before they came for this genocidal maniac.  

Columbus was a piece of shit who supported the sexual slavery of children. So lets have a statue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

Bobby Lee was the one man most responsible for preventing the Confederacy from morphing into a bunch of armed vigilante bands for the decades after the war, and for that I am thankful.  That, and for being so reasonable about his yard being used as a burying ground for Union Troops.   Fucker should have accepted the command of the Union army when he was asked by Lincoln.

Yeah, and there are some who say good things about mafia dons, too.

They look after their neighborhood, they help the widows and orphans. 

Lee was a traitor to America. As such, I cannot call myself a fan of his.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Asithappens said:

Yeah, and there are some who say good things about mafia dons, too.

They look after their neighborhood, they help the widows and orphans. 

Lee was a traitor to America. As such, I cannot call myself a fan of his.

Sure, there is a black and white version that is easy on the 'ole synapses. 

spacer.png

Now - when can we take down the statues of any fucking Norwegians? Heja, Sverige!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Gatorubet said:

Sure, there is a black and white version that is easy on the 'ole synapses. 

spacer.png

Now - when can we take down the statues of any fucking Norwegians? Heja, Sverige!

If that helps you sleep at night, then go for it.

I get it, you and others find Lee to be a noble character. And maybe he was. 

My point is that he was a noble traitor to his country. I'm not a fan of traitors. You are. Is that black and white enough for ya?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, Asithappens said:

My point is that he was a noble traitor to his country. I'm not a fan of traitors. You are. Is that black and white enough for ya?

As long as you have the same principled black and white objection to Washington. Or Sam Houston, for that matter.

Edited by formermav43

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, kevwun said:

Jefferson did some really dirty stuff while he was Secretary of State in his efforts to sabotage Hamilton and the Federalists.  Things that are so disloyal that they could almost be called treasonous.  I have no problem saying he was a bad person.

Jefferson nixed the expansion of slavery into the NW Territory because he believed that controlling its spread would speed its demise. He really did want slavery to end...just not at Monticello and sometime after he left the planet. (One of the people he thwarted in bringing slavery to Indiana was William Henry Harrison, Our Briefest President.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Asithappens said:

Yeah, and there are some who say good things about mafia dons, too.

They look after their neighborhood, they help the widows and orphans. 

Lee was a traitor to America. As such, I cannot call myself a fan of his.

Lee is an interesting person and as a subject of history worthy of study, but I wouldn't want to have a beer with the dude.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gatorubet said:

So ultimately it will be history nerds left to discuss the nuances of the human spirit and psyche with other history nerds.

That’s my fetish!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

My guess is that the fans of Lee (and other confeds) are from the south (deep south, probably) or have strong ties to that region. 

I'm just not a fan of the deep south. From the pseudo-intellectual (imo) argument using states' rights to justify slavery (and to basically lie about the reason for the civil war- states' rights! not about slavery!)  yeah, fuck that, to holding on to the idea that the south was some sort of genteel, noble region. I'm not a fan of the southern baptist church, either. And the current state of the deep south doesn't help matters: still virulently racist in a lot of parts, ignorant, clinging to god and guns. I know a guy who went to VMI a long time ago and they practically worshiped Lee. And Trump has emboldened those dipshits. In a way, that's good b/c we can see who they really are. 

I'm glad to see that the USMC is prohibiting display of the confed flag (loser laundry). Did Lee do the noble thing by being a leader for the group that wanted to rip apart the US? The noble thing, imo, would have been for him to defend the Union. He was a traitor. He was, of course, a lot more than that. But he was a traitor. I'm not sorry if his statues are coming down. 

Edited by Asithappens

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They need to put up Trump statues in place of all these.  So I can assemble a band of deranged lunatics to go around tearing them down and throwing them in large bodies of water.  I'll admit seeing the Brits do their work made me a bit jealous.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, formermav43 said:

As long as you have the same principled black and white objection to Washington. Or Sam Houston, for that matter.

Maybe I missed something, but when was Washington a traitor to the US?

You see, I'm an American, not a Brit. You seem confused about that?

I don't think you made the point that you think you did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Asithappens said:

Maybe I missed something, but when was Washington a traitor to the US?

You see, I'm an American, not a Brit. You seem confused about that?

I don't think you made the point that you think you did.

You said, “I’m not a fan of traitors...Is that black and white enough for ya?”

I don’t think you made the point that you think you did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, SimonBolivar said:

Jefferson also admitted that slavery was wrong.

 

"There must doubtless be an unhappy influence on the manners of our people produced by the existence of slavery among us. The whole commerce between master and slave is a perpetual exercise of the most boisterous passions, the most unremitting despotism on the one part, and degrading submissions on the other."

 

 

Washington had similar misgivings of slavery and emancipated all of his slaves upon his death.  I understand taking down Confederate statues as most of them are dog whistles for white power and supremacy for men who were engaged as traitors against the United States.  The Founding Fathers are almost a century earlier and engaged in something much different from our perspective.  I see no reason to remove them.  There's no country without those arrogant, rich, entitled SOBs.... 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, formermav43 said:

You said, “I’m not a fan of traitors...Is that black and white enough for ya?”

I don’t think you made the point that you think you did.

Traitors to the US.

I made that very clear. To those who can read. And comprehend, that is.

Washington was not a traitor to the US. Lee was. I can't dumb that down any more for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Asithappens said:

Traitors to the US.

I made that very clear. To those who can read. And comprehend, that is.

Washington was not a traitor to the US. Lee was. I can't dumb that down any more for you.

I read exactly what you wrote. Even quoted it back to you. I’m not the one with the comprehension problem here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

103248139_3333338850044115_7231577145725

Leave them up but declare open season for taggers. The Germans left Red Army graffiti in the Reichstag. To me that pic above is beautiful, living history, freedom of speech, and revolutionary spirit. I am beginning to think removing them could come to be akin to historical gaslighting. Oppression? What oppression? I don't see any symbols of systemic racism around here. Do you?

Defaced statues are perpetual reminders of progress. Vanished statues quickly become reminders of nothing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mpu


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Recruiting ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Help ... For Sale ... Politics ... Board Discussion
×
×
  • Create New...