Current Events > Looks like the racist won.

(+) Yeah! (+)

southcoast09 posted...

The Admiral posted...

So monuments honoring the hundreds of thousands of Confederate soldiers who were killed -- almost none of whom ever owned a slave, and including black soldiers who fought for the South - need to be removed because some people in 2017 have hurt feelings?

Sorry, fuck 'em. Those monuments are not racist in the slightest.

Get on your main.
---

southcoast09 posted...

The Admiral posted...

So monuments honoring the hundreds of thousands of Confederate soldiers who were killed -- almost none of whom ever owned a slave, and including black soldiers who fought for the South - need to be removed because some people in 2017 have hurt feelings?

Sorry, fuck 'em. Those monuments are not racist in the slightest.

Most Nazis never threw a Jewish person in camps. Should Germany build monuments for them ?
---

This topic went from 0 to shit real quick.
---

yem69420 posted...

because most of the military commanders weren't farmers?

i mean it isn't like people just had slaves for the fuck of it lol

That don't mean shit. Ulysses S. Grant owned slaves at White Haven. And yes most soldiers didn't own slaves, but that was because you had to be 25yrs to own property. Most soldiers was 16 and up. However, their parents owned slaves and that who they was fighting for.


The Admiral posted...

almost none of whom ever owned a slave, and including black soldiers who fought for the South

You know that's a myth right? There's no records of any Black soldiers fighting for the Confederate. Plus its a known fact that Confederate soldiers would not fight along side slaves. Most slaves was forced to work plantations,and be servants to the Confederate. By the time Grant allowed slaves to join, it was already too late.
---

TheSextMachine posted...

AugustAdoulin posted...

Time to blow the statues up. :v I don't like statues that honor traitors and racists. They could have been moved to somewhere to preserve them from an artistic point of view, but that isn't good enough for the racists. So now they're gonna get defaced.

Mods, please pass this on to the FBI.

i live in ohio

People literally want to destroy history and art because of their feelings. What a time to be alive.
---

StucklnMyPants posted...

People literally want to destroy history and art because of their feelings. What a time to be alive.

Because museums and textbooks don't exist.

StucklnMyPants posted...

People literally want to destroy history and art because of their feelings. What a time to be alive.

You know got damn well people don't get a shit about history. You think most of these people waving the CSA flag take free history classes at the learning annex.
---

I wouldn't want art to be destroyed. Moving them to a museum would have been the ideal course of action. That got blocked though so now it is a free for all. :v I'm not gonna feel bad if something happens to the statues though, tbh.

They're probably ugly anyway tho

AugustAdoulin posted...

I wouldn't want art to be destroyed. Moving them to a museum would have been the ideal course of action.

I agree with this.
---

AugustAdoulin posted...

TheSextMachine posted...

AugustAdoulin posted...

Time to blow the statues up. :v I don't like statues that honor traitors and racists. They could have been moved to somewhere to preserve them from an artistic point of view, but that isn't good enough for the racists. So now they're gonna get defaced.

Mods, please pass this on to the FBI.

i live in ohio

And?
---

ThanksUglyGod posted...

StucklnMyPants posted...

People literally want to destroy history and art because of their feelings. What a time to be alive.

Because museums and textbooks don't exist.

Like those are not whitewashed to hell and back.
---

TheSextMachine posted...

Like those are not whitewashed to hell and back.

In the South they are were they say the war had little to do with slavery.
---

Kineth posted...

southcoast09 posted...

The Admiral posted...

So monuments honoring the hundreds of thousands of Confederate soldiers who were killed -- almost none of whom ever owned a slave, and including black soldiers who fought for the South - need to be removed because some people in 2017 have hurt feelings?

Sorry, fuck 'em. Those monuments are not racist in the slightest.

Get on your main.

Lmao, what do you mean? You know that this account and Payzmaykr (suspended until June) are my only two.
---

southcoast09 posted...

Kineth posted...

southcoast09 posted...

The Admiral posted...

So monuments honoring the hundreds of thousands of Confederate soldiers who were killed -- almost none of whom ever owned a slave, and including black soldiers who fought for the South - need to be removed because some people in 2017 have hurt feelings?

Sorry, fuck 'em. Those monuments are not racist in the slightest.

Get on your main.

Lmao, what do you mean? You know that this account and Payzmaykr (suspended until June) are my only two.

I'm pretty sure I don't know that is true.
---

I don't agree with the removal of the monuments. They're important to history.
---

CrimsonRage posted...

America is the only country that honours its traitors.

To be fair, Manitoba and Saskatchewan also honour Louie Riel, who was considered a traitor to Canada due to his actions against the government in favour of the Metis people. He's a traitor to many, but is now seen as part of our history and heritage.
---

it was a bloody war that many Americans on both sides lost their lives in. Nothing wrong with these monuments.
---

This topic.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vE2WQNfw70Y
---

MakoReizei posted...

it was a bloody war that many Americans on both sides lost their lives in. Nothing wrong with these monuments.

SO should Germany have Nazi monuments ?
---

Even if not all of the Confederates had slaves, the war was over slavery, and even then they were traitors. They don't deserve to have a public monument, maybe in a museum, but they don't deserve any honor.
---

cjsdowg posted...

MakoReizei posted...

it was a bloody war that many Americans on both sides lost their lives in. Nothing wrong with these monuments.

SO should Germany have Nazi monuments ?

don't know, don't care. These are Americans, not Nazis
---

Oh I thought David Duke got elected or something.
---

MakoReizei posted...

don't know, don't care. These are Americans, not Nazis

They were American who attacked their fellow Americans causing the a war that killed so many. Yet you think they should be honored ? Also good deflection.
---

Only in this country do we honor people who commit treason.
---

Spooking posted...

MLK was anti-gay, so perhaps in a decade or so we'll be removing his statues since he was homophobic.

MLK wasn't commiting treason over his stance of black people.
---

Wait, who's racist?
---

StarReaper13 posted...

Spooking posted...

MLK was anti-gay, so perhaps in a decade or so we'll be removing his statues since he was homophobic.

MLK wasn't commiting treason over his stance of black people.

I have a feeling you don't really understand the Civil war and that neither side was completely innocent. Slavery wasn't the main motivation for the war, from either account. Lincoln wasn't the most progressive person even for that time, and the people dying for the south in the war weren't the slave owners. The slave owners had money and didn't fight for the most part.
---

1NfamousACE_2 posted...

Only in this country do we honor people who commit treason.

That is an incredibly ignorant hyperbolic statement.
---

cjsdowg posted...

MakoReizei posted...

don't know, don't care. These are Americans, not Nazis

They were American who attacked their fellow Americans causing the a war that killed so many. Yet you think they should be honored ? Also good deflection.

Have you ever read anything about the Civil War? That sounds like a three year old giving their summary of events.
---

MARKINGRAM22 posted...

I have a feeling you don't really understand the Civil war and that neither side was completely innocent. Slavery wasn't the main motivation for the war, from either account. Lincoln wasn't the most progressive person even for that time, and the people dying for the south in the war weren't the slave owners. The slave owners had money and didn't fight for the most part.

The South left the union to protect slavery ( the documents at the time support this). If they South didn't leave then there would have been no war.
---

StarReaper13 posted...

Even if not all of the Confederates had slaves, the war was over slavery, and even then they were traitors. They don't deserve to have a public monument, maybe in a museum, but they don't deserve any honor.

Almost anyone in history has questionable views today and you are ignoring so many intricacy's by just going good guy, bad guy. It is no different than dumb rednecks who ignore any negative narratives of the confederacy.
---

cjsdowg posted...

The Admiral posted...

So monuments honoring the hundreds of thousands of Confederate soldiers who were killed -- almost none of whom ever owned a slave, and including black soldiers who fought for the South - need to be removed because some people in 2017 have hurt feelings?

Sorry, f*** 'em. Those monuments are not racist in the slightest.

Most Nazis never threw a Jewish person in camps. Should Germany build monuments for them ?

I was thinking about how he might respond to this and I think there's actually a difference in that the confederates were at least trying to preserve their way of life (so there's an aspect of self-interest) but the Nazis were actually going out of their way to persecute jews and minorities so it's not quite the same
---

cjsdowg posted...

MARKINGRAM22 posted...

I have a feeling you don't really understand the Civil war and that neither side was completely innocent. Slavery wasn't the main motivation for the war, from either account. Lincoln wasn't the most progressive person even for that time, and the people dying for the south in the war weren't the slave owners. The slave owners had money and didn't fight for the most part.

The South left the union to protect slavery ( the documents at the time support this). If they South didn't leave then there would have been no war.

Not saying slavery wasn't part, but it was in no way the main conflict. It was Lincoln trying to usurp power and preserve the union, while the south didn't want Lincoln taking power from these states. Lincoln didn't care at all about Slavery, and didn't respect the lives of black people. At the same time there were notable figures of the confederacy who didn't agree with the concept of slavery. Look I wish there was some nutty confederate flag waver so I wouldn't be trapped into this corner, but it is so ignorant and dishonest to ignore all the nuances of this conflict. Like most wars it isn't as simple as good and evil. There is a reason why all these non slave owners were dying for the confederacy they didn't care that some rich land owners would lose their free labor.
---

Honestly you could make a moral argument against most historical landmarks and statues being torn down. Why not push for the coliseum to be torn down? It is an arena where they forced slaves to fight to the death. In Asia they have monuments of Genghis Khan who committed more rapes than anyone in history and committed genocide against villages for petty slights. So many of our presidents were not only slave owners, but many were violent. George Washington supposedly would hobble his slaves. I mean if you were to compare his views to Robert E Lee it is hard to justify that Washington isn't the problematic one.

I would say if they didn't just immediately destroy most of these Nazi statues and are pieces cause it was immediately just looked at as mass genocide with little nuance besides that, I don't think they should destroy a statue. Art and history isn't supposed to make us just feel good.
---

MARKINGRAM22 posted...

Not saying slavery wasn't part, but it was in no way the main conflict. It was Lincoln trying to usurp power and preserve the union....

Once more, the South at the time said that they left due to Slavery. They made it clear as day. Lincoln taking power, South Carolina claimed that Lincoln being elected fairly was an hostile act. And they even cited him being an abolitionist. South Carolina left the Union 3 days after he got into office.


Leaders in South Carolina even said that they were leaving because Lincoln respected black people.

I have never doubted what Virginia would do when the alternatives present themselves to her intelligent and gallant people, to choose between an association with her sisters and the dominion of a people, who have chosen their leader upon the single idea that the African is equal to the Anglo-Saxon, and with the purpose of placing our slaves on equality with ourselves and our friends of every condition! and if we of South Carolina have aided in your deliverance from tyranny and degradation, as you suppose, it will only the more assure us that we have performed our duty to ourselves and our sisters in taking the first decided step to preserve an inheritance left us by an ancestry whose spirit would forbid its being tarnished by assassins. We, of South Carolina, hope soon to great you in a Southern Confederacy, where white men shall rule our destinies, and from which we may transmit to our posterity the rights, privileges and honor left us by our ancestors.

John McQueen-House of Reps. USA CSA

Mississippi Declaration of succession.

Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin. That we do not overstate the dangers to our institution, a reference to a few facts will sufficiently prove.
---

MARKINGRAM22 posted...

It was Lincoln trying to usurp power and preserve the union, while the south didn't want Lincoln taking power from these states

And they literally committed treason and the south still honors them over it

You didnt really disprove anything anyone is saying, despite taking 6 chances to do so. I dont think anyone has come in as a Lincoln defender or said the North didnt do any wrong too

Lets also not ignore the fact that Black people in the north protest a shit ton of monuments/memorials that have racist ties. My alma mater got the name of its football stadium removed 2 years ago, as it honored a segregationist president

The thing about history is it has always favored those who craft it (not even necessarily the winners). So long as you write the textbooks, your history will always be told, getting public displays and things named after you is going beyond just retelling history and goes into honoring (and thus, we get Texas telling us the slaves were indentured servants that immigrated here).

We dont have statues and buildings named after certain figures who have incredible historical impact, and many of these figures have stood for over 100 years anyway. This is a case of tradition for traditions sake

And to the above about MLK, i honestly wouldnt oppose removing his statues. His post-humous deification in efforts to make his approach the "right" one (when he was despised during life) is among the most dishonest things this country has done nationally in the last 50 years, and he also shutdown a lot of other Civil Rights/SNCC Leaders and Organizers who actually had far more inclusive, progressive and less one track minded pursuits, like Baker, Rustin and even Rosa Parks
---

MARKINGRAM22 posted...

Honestly you could make a moral argument against most historical landmarks and statues being torn down. Why not push for the coliseum to be torn down? It is an arena where they forced slaves to fight to the death. In Asia they have monuments of Genghis Khan who committed more rapes than anyone in history and committed genocide against villages for petty slights. So many of our presidents were not only slave owners, but many were violent. George Washington supposedly would hobble his slaves. I mean if you were to compare his views to Robert E Lee it is hard to justify that Washington isn't the problematic one.

I mean, i wouldnt disagree with any of this. Im also anti-imperialist, so i may be a bit biased. But the time of honoring the totality of someones existence because of one act is past. Not even trynna be thought police here or say "they held bigoted ideals". Im talking about people who actually used their power to harm and oppress others. At this point I would have expected our countries views on George Washington to have shifted a bit. He'll never go away as he was the first, though id have no problem if an individual state would rather not have him honored and votes to get him out without having their efforts externally suppressed. Thats another key issue here
---

Lol, just fucking lol. The Confederacy stood for slavery. That is indisputable fact. Amazing the loopholes White people jump through to justify their racism.

MARKINGRAM22 posted...

Honestly you could make a moral argument against most historical landmarks and statues being torn down. Why not push for the coliseum to be torn down? It is an arena where they forced slaves to fight to the death. In Asia they have monuments of Genghis Khan who committed more rapes than anyone in history and committed genocide against villages for petty slights. So many of our presidents were not only slave owners, but many were violent. George Washington supposedly would hobble his slaves. I mean if you were to compare his views to Robert E Lee it is hard to justify that Washington isn't the problematic one.

I would say if they didn't just immediately destroy most of these Nazi statues and are pieces cause it was immediately just looked at as mass genocide with little nuance besides that, I don't think they should destroy a statue. Art and history isn't supposed to make us just feel good.

Those people and empires are long dead and have no effect on people today. The Civil War happened some 150 years ago and we're still feeling it's effect today. It's not ancient history.
---

I don't why anyone even cares either way.

Unless the statue is in the way of some development it's not worth wasting time on.
---

pikachupwnage posted...

I don't why anyone even cares either way.

Unless the statue is in the way of some development it's not worth wasting time on.

proximity likely hampers ones ability to remain indifferent. i can imagine, given the state and place, its possible that many of the LA residents are descendants of the very black folk who lived during these times. i can imagine those black folk spread the stories down to their children, and so on

its easy to come in over a hundred years later and question why someone might care about something, but when you put the shoe on the other foot. i wouldnt want someone who enslaved my ancestors to be honored. especially when it didnt just happen to my individual family, but whole communities, whole states, and an entire color of people
---

CurzonDax posted...

Lol, just fucking lol. The Confederacy stood for slavery. That is indisputable fact. Amazing the loopholes White people jump through to justify their racism.

Honestly I think it is shameful. Why can't the south own up to the awful things they stood for during the civil war? Hasn't it been long enough for them to accept responsibility? They're still clinging to it. Flying confederate flags, protecting these statues.

:v I wish we'd let the south go when we had the chance. Bunch of dead weight states.

CurzonDax posted...

Those people and empires are long dead and have no effect on people today. The Civil War happened some 150 years ago and we're still feeling it's effect today. It's not ancient history.

Funny how one of the most pc nations in the world Germany allows concentration camps to still stand even the most infamous ones Auschwitz still stands to this day.

By your logic they should be destroyed because racism instead of preserving them as piece of dark history that we should learn from and to move past.

The moment we go around purging any history that doesn't fit your agenda that's the moment we have no history to show
---

CurzonDax posted...

Lol, just fucking lol. The Confederacy stood for slavery. That is indisputable fact. Amazing the loopholes White people jump through to justify their racism.

MARKINGRAM22 posted...

Honestly you could make a moral argument against most historical landmarks and statues being torn down. Why not push for the coliseum to be torn down? It is an arena where they forced slaves to fight to the death. In Asia they have monuments of Genghis Khan who committed more rapes than anyone in history and committed genocide against villages for petty slights. So many of our presidents were not only slave owners, but many were violent. George Washington supposedly would hobble his slaves. I mean if you were to compare his views to Robert E Lee it is hard to justify that Washington isn't the problematic one.

I would say if they didn't just immediately destroy most of these Nazi statues and are pieces cause it was immediately just looked at as mass genocide with little nuance besides that, I don't think they should destroy a statue. Art and history isn't supposed to make us just feel good.

Those people and empires are long dead and have no effect on people today. The Civil War happened some 150 years ago and we're still feeling it's effect today. It's not ancient history.

1. Not white, but like your hypocritical racist generalization
2. Didn't say they didn't support slavery

the fuck are you talking about? How about you actually respond next time and not just argue against some fictional strawman.
---

MilitantHobo posted...

CurzonDax posted...

Those people and empires are long dead and have no effect on people today. The Civil War happened some 150 years ago and we're still feeling it's effect today. It's not ancient history.

Funny how one of the most pc nations in the world Germany allows concentration camps to still stand even the most infamous ones Auschwitz still stands to this day.

By your logic they should be destroyed because racism instead of preserving them as piece of dark history that we should learn from and to move past.

The moment we go around purging any history that doesn't fit your agenda that's the moment we have no history to show

Statues glorify the person depicted. Letting a concentration camp stand doesn't glorify the holocaust.

Do you think Germany has any statues of Hitler standing around as "reminders"?

AugustAdoulin posted...

MilitantHobo posted...

CurzonDax posted...

Those people and empires are long dead and have no effect on people today. The Civil War happened some 150 years ago and we're still feeling it's effect today. It's not ancient history.

Funny how one of the most pc nations in the world Germany allows concentration camps to still stand even the most infamous ones Auschwitz still stands to this day.

By your logic they should be destroyed because racism instead of preserving them as piece of dark history that we should learn from and to move past.

The moment we go around purging any history that doesn't fit your agenda that's the moment we have no history to show

Statues glorify the person depicted. Letting a concentration camp stand doesn't glorify the holocaust.

Do you think Germany has any statues of Hitler standing around as "reminders"?

Considering they are authoritarians who don't allow people to even speak of their history cause they are embarrassed to discuss their own history, I don't think they are a good example. I mean all around the world there are monuments, structures, and symbols that represent horrible things. I guess we should destroy sarcophagus's of eyptian pharaohs. I mean these were violent slave owners. They didn't do good things, and these for sure were meant to honor them. As well as the pyramids. These arguments of destroying landmarks and art based on offense are always shaky. Maybe we should be reminded of bad shit sometimes.
---

AugustAdoulin posted...

Statues glorify the person depicted. Letting a concentration camp stand doesn't glorify the holocaust.

It kind of does, according to your logic if it's not 100 percent squeaky clean and still stands it glorifies racism must be destroyed.

AugustAdoulin posted...

Do you think Germany has any statues of Hitler standing around as "reminders"?

Apples and oranges, people like Robert E Lee are heroes to New Orleans who helped stop it from being completely destroyed like Atlanta or Jackson from monsters like Sherman and deserve their statues

Sorry if it doesn't fit your agenda
---

Cj_WlLL_VVlN posted...

Capn Circus posted...

prince_leo posted...

I'd like to ask that person how often conservatives burn down their towns

BLM doesn't burn down towns or loot or riot. That's just a few bad apples that comes out every time BLM protests.

So the group that firebombed a Minneapolis police station, blocking all roads for a two-block radius for DAYS, ORGANIZED BY BLM, was just a 'few bad apples?'
---

MilitantHobo posted...

AugustAdoulin posted...

Statues glorify the person depicted. Letting a concentration camp stand doesn't glorify the holocaust.

It kind of does, according to your logic if it's not 100 percent squeaky clean and still stands it glorifies racism must be destroyed.

AugustAdoulin posted...

Do you think Germany has any statues of Hitler standing around as "reminders"?

Apples and oranges, people like Robert E Lee are heroes to New Orleans who helped stop it from being completely destroyed like Atlanta or Jackson from monsters like Sherman and deserve their statues

Sorry if it doesn't fit your agenda

Hitler was a hero to certain people too.

I still don't get how you call that "apples and oranges" when you just tried to compare a statue and a concentration camp a few posts up. :u