Removal of Confederate statues and flags?

Sam-Nary

Ad Honorem
Jun 2012
6,652
At present SD, USA
#51
Is someone proposing a David Duke statute? LOL

I don't know much of him. Maybe you should quote him disagreeing that the white supremacists have died off to support you claim.

I heard him on a YouTube talking about Jews for maybe a minute, and can say he and I disagree profoundly on that subject. But a racist is not necessarily a supremacist. He surely seemed concerned about Jewish supremacy.
I'm not aware of any statue being proposed for him, but you're saying that the white supremacists are dead... David Duke, one of the former leaders of the KKK is still alive and has still repeated many of the same pieces of racism that he spewed back during his time as leader of the Klan. The fact that no one has made a monument to him is irrelevant to the matter that he is a white supremacist and is still alive.

And it's people like Duke that have often used these Confederate memorials and monuments as some sort of political tool to support their own agendas, which does little to talk about the history of the era in question.

If one wants a statue of RE Lee... fine, but put in a place where Lee served during the Civil War with some historical reference that would display his actions there. Don't put it in practically every southern town with the only annotation being "hero of the Confederacy."
 
Jul 2016
7,137
USA
#52
I was agreeing with you, too. But I would stop short of saying "nothing more." There is a kernel of legitimate grievance in a lot of historical memory. There is also money invested into selective frenzy whipping.
There are schools all over the South in what are now predominately African American communities that are named after Confederate politicians and generals. I can understand completely them renaming them, that should have been done years ago as soon as the demographically change became obvious. Its the other stuff, the political zealots going after anything and everything they see as oppositional and exploitable while at the same time ignoring other things in their selective outrage that really annoys me.
 
Oct 2016
28
Ashland
#53
Once again, those who have no History of their own(or are ashamed of it ) hate and seek to destroy that of those who do. As Trump said, 'Who's next? George Washington? Thomas Jefferson?'
It's an old story; examples are all too sadly evident around the world: in Mexico (where the Cathedral in Mexico City was built atop Templo Mayor) and in Istanbul (where the Hagia Sophia was turned at one time into a mosque(a museum currently). There are many other examples.
 
Oct 2018
53
Minneapolis, MN
#54
Was there any such legal entity as Citizen of the Union before the the 14th amendment created dual citizenship?

That is exactly what the Secessionists were doing. Fighting to have control over their little corner of America that their ancestors founded and took from the Indians - just like their brethren in the north did. And in their own little area of the country, they'd like to have their own little statues.
Yes there was citizenship before the 14th. Look at the Dred Scott decision. Naturalization act of 1790. Constitution. All in parts helped determine who was and was not a citizen.


2nd part. No.. They were fighting AGAINST the United States of America, to have their new Confederate states of America, where race based slavery could be protected and expanded. That's the opposite of fighting for the USA
 
Oct 2018
53
Minneapolis, MN
#55
And Lee didn't like slavery, and questioned the legitimacy of secession. Normally, you might throw in his heroic efforts at the Battle of Veracruz, but that is not on the popular war list any more, either.

If you are looking for justice and equity in political opinions, prepare for disappointment. In politics, a lot of people just want to win.
Actually that's a lie that white supremacists have been promoting for years but source history debunks rather simply.

Sure lee said slavery was bad for white people, but he also said it was "Necessary" for the blacks. Kinda like a pedophile admitting what he does is wrong but wanting to keep doing it doesn't make him a "good" pedophile.

He also was completely for slavery. Took a leave of absence from the military in order to fight in court to keep his father in laws slaves that were put under his control when they fought legally for their freedom. Used sickening methods of torture against his own slaves when they tried to run away to their freedom after he caught them. As a General, allowed his armies to go on slave raids into the USA. Also you can read his letters to Grant on POW trades where he refuses to include Black US soldiers in those trades because they were "Confederate property".
 
Likes: Code Blue
Oct 2018
53
Minneapolis, MN
#56
Once again, those who have no History of their own(or are ashamed of it ) hate and seek to destroy that of those who do. As Trump said, 'Who's next? George Washington? Thomas Jefferson?'
It's an old story; examples are all too sadly evident around the world: in Mexico (where the Cathedral in Mexico City was built atop Templo Mayor) and in Istanbul (where the Hagia Sophia was turned at one time into a mosque(a museum currently). There are many other examples.
Nah, simple delineation. If they took up arms AGAINST the USA, they don't deserve statues and places of honor. No statues for 9/11 terrorists, school shooters, hitler, confederate leaders, Nidal Hassan, etc.

No jumping through hoops needed there. Sure plenty of founding Americans were flawed men, but they fought FOR the USA. Those who fought AGAINST it don't get honored.
 
Oct 2012
5,352
#57
It is a pity that this contrast of ideas exist, even today. I believe that all the discussion about slavery and the South's way of life had very very little to do with the real causes of the war. Today the war is remembered as a war of contrasting principles and incompatible world visions. I believe that the only cause was economic, money in the pocket of someone who someone else's wanted in theirs. Anything else is propaganda that turned into something more serious than intended and survived the end of the war.
I made a video about it.
If the secession of the states that formed the Confederacy was not all about slavery, why did the Confederate leadership repeatedly say it was all about slavery? How is it "propaganda" to take the historical figures responsible for the American Civil War at their word?

"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. "

Avalon Project - Confederate States of America - Mississippi Secession


"A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the States north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery. He is to be entrusted with the administration of the common Government, because he has declared that that “Government cannot endure permanently half slave, half free,” and that the public mind must rest in the belief that slavery is in the course of ultimate extinction. This sectional combination for the submersion of the Constitution, has been aided in some of the States by elevating to citizenship, persons who, by the supreme law of the land, are incapable of becoming citizens; and their votes have been used to inaugurate a new policy, hostile to the South, and destructive of its beliefs and safety. "

Avalon Project - Confederate States of America - Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union


"In all the non-slave-holding States, in violation of that good faith and comity which should exist between entirely distinct nations, the people have formed themselves into a great sectional party, now strong enough in numbers to control the affairs of each of those States, based upon the unnatural feeling of hostility to these Southern States and their beneficent and patriarchal system of African slavery, proclaiming the debasing doctrine of the equality of all men, irrespective of race or color--a doctrine at war with nature, in opposition to the experience of mankind, and in violation of the plainest revelations of the Divine Law. They demand the abolition of negro slavery throughout the confederacy, the recognition of political equality between the white and the negro races, and avow their determination to press on their crusade against us, so long as a negro slave remains in these States...

...In view of these and many other facts, it is meet that our own views should be distinctly proclaimed.

We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable.
That in this free government all white men are and of right ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights; that the servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations; while the destruction of the existing relations between the two races, as advocated by our sectional enemies, would bring inevitable calamities upon both and desolation upon the fifteen slave-holding States.


By the secession of six of the slave-holding States, and the certainty that others will speedily do likewise, Texas has no alternative but to remain in an isolated connection with the North, or unite her destinies with the South."

DECLARATION OF CAUSES: February 2, 1861 A declaration of the causes which impel the State of Texas to secede from the Federal Union. | TSLAC


"The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution African slavery as it exists amongst us the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the “rock upon which the old Union would split.” He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact. But whether he fully comprehended the great truth upon which that rock stood and stands, may be doubted. The prevailing ideas entertained by him and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old constitution, were that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with, but the general opinion of the men of that day was that, somehow or other in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away. This idea, though not incorporated in the constitution, was the prevailing idea at that time. The constitution, it is true, secured every essential guarantee to the institution while it should last, and hence no argument can be justly urged against the constitutional guarantees thus secured, because of the common sentiment of the day. Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the government built upon it fell when the “storm came and the wind blew.”

Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth."

---Alexander Stephens, Vice President of the Confederate States of America
 
Oct 2012
5,352
#58
On the causes of the American Civi War, part two....

"Our people have come to this on the question of slavery. I am willing, in that address to rest it upon that question. I think it is the great central point from which we are now proceeding, and I am not willing to divert the public attention from it."

---Lawrence Keitt, former US Congressman and delegate to South Carolina's secession convention, in remarks made at the same


"The area of slavery must be extended correlative with its antagonism, or it will be put speedily in the 'course of ultimate extinction.'....The extension of slavery is the vital point of the whole controversy between the North and the South...Amendments to the federal constitution are urged by some as a panacea for all the ills that beset us. That instrument is amply sufficient as it now stands, for the protection of Southern rights, if it was only enforced. The South wants practical evidence of good faith from the North, not mere paper agreements and compromises. They believe slavery a sin, we do not, and there lies the trouble."

---Henry M. Rector, governor of Arkansas, in remarks made at Arkansas' Secession Convention



"Sir, the great question which is now uprooting this Government to its foundation---the great question which underlies all our deliberations here, is the question of African slavery..."

---Thomas F. Goode, delegate to the Virginia secession convention, in remarks made at the same


"The question of Slavery is the rock upon which the Old Government split: it is the cause of secession."

---G. T. Yelverton, delegate to Alabama's secession convention, in remarks made at the same


"Mr. President, the fierce strife we have had with the Northern States, which has led to the disruption of the Government, is a trumpet-tongued answer to this question. They have declared, by the election of Lincoln, “There shall be no more slave territory–no more slave States.” To this the Cotton States have responded by acts of secession and a Southern Confederacy; which is but a solemn declaration of these States, that they will not submit to the Northern idea of restricting slavery to its present limits, and confining it to the slave States."

---S.C. Posey, delegate to Alabama's secession convention, in remarks made at the same


"Now, Mr. President, I submit that while our commission is of much higher import and dignity, it is, in one respect, by no means so broad. We are sent to protect, not so much property, as white supremacy, and the great political right of internal self-control---but only against one specified and single danger alone, i.e. the danger of Abolition rule."

--Jefferson Buford, delegate to Alabama's secession, in remarks made at the same


"I say, then, that viewed from that standpoint, there is but one single subject of complaint which Virginia has to make against the government under which we live; a complaint made by the whole South, and that is on the subject of African slavery..."

---John B. Baldwin, delegate to Virginia's secession convention, in remarks made a the same


"The people of Louisiana would consider it a most fatal blow to African slavery, if Texas did not secede or having seceded did not join her destiny to theirs in a Southern Confederacy. If she remains in the Union the abolitionists would continue their work of incendiarism and murder...

...As a separate republic, Louisiana remembers too well the whisperings of European diplomacy for the abolition of slavery in the times of annexation not to be apprehensive of bolder demonstrations from the same quarter and the North in this country. The people of the slave holding States are bound together by the same necessity and determination to preserve African slavery. "

---George Williamson, Louisiana commissioner to the Texas secession convention, in remarks made at the same


And so on and so forth...

That is really just a small sample. Shall I continue?
 
Feb 2015
3,457
Caribbean
#59
I'm not aware of any statue being proposed for him, but you're saying that the white supremacists are dead... David Duke, one of the former leaders of the KKK is still alive and has still repeated many of the same pieces of racism that he spewed back during his time as leader of the Klan. The fact that no one has made a monument to him is irrelevant to the matter that he is a white supremacist and is still alive.
Sam, you often give me a good challenge. Thanks. I thought because I have not heard from you that were still busy trying to think up an answer to my last FDR question.

A few points bear making on the Duke speculation.
- Red Herring - If you can't establish that even one-half of one-percent of the population espouses an idea, don't sane people employing anything resembling normal statistical inference round that off to zero? Or does it have to reach an absolute point of final solution before we can say zero?
- Real evidence - Your claim was that Duke would disagree with me. Unless, he has been asked the specific question, I would not be making any definitive statements about what his answer would be. What is your evidientiary basis to claim that Duke would not agree with me that the answer is yes, if the question were put to him, - have the white supremacists died off without progeny.
- False Conflation - Racism is not the equivalent white supremacy. That may be a nuanced distinction and some can't wrap their heads around the idea that you can believe your group is intellectually superior, but that the inferior group still has equal rights in the eyes of the law and God. So, I would clearly draw the line that anyone who believes in equal protection of law is definitively not a supremacist.

IMO, anyone espousing that the white race ought to rule by virtue of its lack of melanin could not be elected anything, not even dog catcher. If you want to argue this political movement is alive and well, and want an objective evidence-seeking person to believe it, than show me these office-holders who campaigned on, were elected on, and legislate in pursuit of this agenda. Otherwise, we next have to delve into the meaning of "alive and well."

"hero of the Confederacy."
Isn't that "true"? Wouldn't the Confederacy have been defeated sooner without him? Isn't that label at least as partially true as many other claims made in this thread that you do not object to? (Didn't someone refer to this as selective outrage)? Do you think that 'slavery was the cause of the war' is 100% of the truth? Or, is it more like most one-sentence political points of view, an oversimplification, and thus somewhat misleading by omission? Wouldn't it be more accurate, but still less than the whole truth, to say secession caused the war? Didn't Lincoln argue that he was pursuing a military option against secession, not a military option to end slavery (and did he not refrain from invading slave states that had not seceded)? And without using the military against secession, would the country not have continued in its Pax Buchanan slavery and all?
 
Last edited:
Jan 2017
1,982
Republika Srpska
#60
  • Maki

    Maki

Didn't Lincoln argue that he was pursuing a military option against secession, not a military option to end slavery (and did he not refrain from invading slave states that had not seceded)? And without using the military against secession, would the country not have continued in its Pax Buchanan slavery and all?
Lincoln also later made the end of slavery an explicit Union war goal.
 

Similar History Discussions