Reply Mon 27 Oct, 2003 05:48 pm
I was stationed in Texas in 1948 from what I observed white people there still believed and acted as if they were still the masters. And that blacks were less than people. Those were the vestiges of slavery that you claim the south was against. That being almost 100 years after the civil war.
0 Replies
Joe Nation
Reply Mon 27 Oct, 2003 08:58 pm
To the deniers of truth one must always thrust the out stretched fist and say "Stop."

ebrown_p wrote:
OK, but I am just saying that it really doesn't matter...
JoefromChicago wrote:
I strongly disagree. The myth that the South fought over issues unrelated to slavery allows partisans of the "Lost Cause" to ignore the inherent racism of their position and permits them to claim some sort of moral equality with other resistance movements. It allows them to turn a blind eye to more than a century of oppression while thinking that all the "darkies" were happy and contented in the antebellum South, just like they were depicted in "Gone With the Wind" and "Birth of a Nation." It gives them reason to view Confederate symbols as "inoffensive" rather than as relics of a barbarous and inhumane system. And it justifies their continued discrimination of minorities because it really doesn't matter if we get our history right or not.
Obviously, history matters, and this particular issue matters more than most. Southerngrl's screeds are evidence of why it matters so much
emphasis mine.

So well said it deserves a re-read. There is a very well organized effort in this country to project an air of nobleness to the South's cause. No, no, the south, they say, wasn't fighting for slavery but for State's Rights. Of course, the most important state right they fighting for was the chance to make a state a slave state, but the deniers won't admit to that.
A trip through the South today reveals statues and monuments raised in tribute to the traitors of the Confederacy. Oh, but wasn't it a noble cause?
No, it was a cause of shame and shamefulness that ought be acknowledged on the street corners of Mississippi instead of turned into some kind of weird celebration of man's inhumanity.

Joe (not from Chicago) but boy do I like the way he thinks Nation
0 Replies
ebrown p
Reply Mon 27 Oct, 2003 09:40 pm
So Joe and Joe -- What are you proposing we do?

Of course the Confederate flag is an offensive symbol. But it is clearly protected as free speech. And as southerngrl has said clearly, she (and the minority of people who agree with her) are not going to give it up. The ACLU will (rightly) back her up on this.

The confederate flag is no longer the symbol of fear that it once was. It is now an impotent symbol held onto by pathetic people who can not give up a mythical past.

There will always be a number of people who will hold to these ideas - as backwards and unjust as they are. This is a fact of life in a democracy.

But the truth has already won in America. As southerngrl has complained loudly, history is taught in the schools. Legal segregation has been abolished. Lincoln is widely celebrated. Difficult issues like affirmative action are being widely discussed, in a mostly responsible way, in public forums.

The partisans will always "turn a blind eye", "ignore inherent racism" and all that stuff. There ain't a thing you or I can do about it...

Except, of course, countinue as part of our very successful thriving Democracy. Of course I agree we should counter the devisive claims of southerngrl et al. But we need not worry.

Democracy marches on with them and in spite of them. We will never completely stamp out these ideas, nor should we.

Our Democracy is much too strong to be serious threatened by southerngrl's screeds.
0 Replies
Reply Tue 28 Oct, 2003 08:56 am
For those who are still following this thread, I heard an interview on NPR this morning of an author named (I believe) Edward Jones, a Black man who remembered hearing, when he was in college, a stray piece of information that prior to the Civil War, there were free Blacks who owned slaves. That memory stayed with him and he has written, "The Known World," short-listed for the National Book Award, about the situation.

Frank Apisa: Years ago, I had a friend at the University of Michigan, working on a phd in philosophy who said that he disliked all arguments for the existance of God because they simply moved the whole course of argument one step backwards. In other words, the answer, "Because god made it," still demands one more answer.

Many arguments are like that: they are answered in a pat way, with one more questions remaining. A classic example of that is the position that the Civil War was fought over states' rights. Despite the fact that states' rights is an individual philosophical issue, in the context of the Civil War, the question remaining to be asked is, "States' rights to decide what?" and the answer is still slavery.
0 Replies
Reply Tue 28 Oct, 2003 09:11 am
ebrown_p wrote:
This thread should be considered as little more than foolish fun.

A bit of sparring and a bit of ridicule but nothing more. Don't buy into southerngrl war rhetoric Wink

I'm not exactly sure what you're saying here, ebrown_p. I'm not buying into southerngrl's rhetoric, but I am taking her question seriously -- and it's a question that should be taken seriously, for all the reasons that I mentioned in my previous post. Furthermore, it's a valid historical question, one that has been debated by scholars for over a century.

Frankly, ebrown_p, I find your entire attitude puzzling. You've all but said that history doesn't matter. That's fine, but then I have to wonder: why are you here in a history forum? You may want to use this opportunity to ridicule southerngrl, but don't be disappointed if others engaged in this thread don't share your enthusiasm for this particular objective.

I'm not here to ridicule anyone, and if anyone wants to discuss this, or any other historical issue in a fair, intelligent manner, then I'm willing to participate. And I would encourage anyone who is not interested in history to explore the wide array of topics covered in the other fine forums offered on this site.
0 Replies
Reply Tue 28 Oct, 2003 09:52 am
plain old me I have stated in the past on other threads that growing up I was a minority white kid in my school and got it from both sides....blacks rolled me for my lunch money and called me white bitch while white kids who knew I was from the "wrong" side of the tracks told me to stay with the rest of the niggers and completely rejected me.

Blacks and whites...equally racist...equally bullies....equally non caring about anything but themselves and welcoming any chance to ridicule anything outside their limited range of experience.

I was bitter about it most all my life and still to this day feel like people are a pretty sorry lot regardless of race color or creed, but I no longer hold it against them, because I include myself in the group.

We are a failed group we humans. We fail to meet the lofty goals we set for ourselves every day.

The only difference between decent people and scumbags is that the decent people at least make the attempt to live up to the ideals of tolerance, acceptance, and opportunity we claim to live by.

We fail, but we continue to try hopefully, and in this way we make grudging but steady progress. This entire process takes place, and must take place, in the human heart and spirit. No amount of legislation can make it happen. We need to look inward.
0 Replies
ebrown p
Reply Tue 28 Oct, 2003 10:34 am
Joe (from Chicago)

I am sorry, but I have trouble taking this thread so seriously. I did not mean to say that history doesn't matter. I do believe that this discussion doesn't matter.

This is a thread entitled "The South was Right!". It consists of one person who happens to have a Confederate flag as her avatar, arguing against I don't know many how many other people who are pretty much in agreement.

The implication is that this historical argument has some bearing on current politics. It simply does not. Whether the Civil war was about slavery or not has anything to do with the issues of the day.

If southerngrl can prove that this is the case, will it change your views on say gun control, religious monuments or affirmative action? I am pretty sure I can safely say no.

Go back and read this discussion again. Southerngrl is making a fringe argument she uses to support an extreme agenda. Her arguments have no basis in fact and are quite ridiculous. Taking this argument too seriously is silly.

I find sotherngrl's political position, and her use of Confederate symbols quite offensive. She has the right to express her position in any way she likes.

I do not have the right to censor her views, nor would I want to. However "ridicule" isalso a valid form of political speech.

In this case, ridicule seems like the most appropriate response.
0 Replies
Child of the Light
Reply Wed 29 Oct, 2003 05:59 pm
southerngrl wrote:
Child of the Light wrote:
Southerngrl sounds like the typical hypocritical Bapist.

Can you read? My religion is non-denominational (since God said we are all one under Him). I don't believe in denominations who twist the Bible...the New Testament is all I "TRY" to go I am human.

What is hypocritical? Again, yal keep spewing incinuations about me but won't state how?

I rarely read the INCREDIBLY long post, and most of yours have been INCREDIBLY long.

And I am a southern gentleman. One of the few left I will add. Most of the guys down here smack the **** out of there ladies if they don't do what they are told. And the days of courting and saranation are long gone, it seems that cruelty has taken their sad as it may be.

YOU SAID "YAL'' IT'S YA'LL, come on you gotta know that SOUTHerngrl
0 Replies
Reply Tue 4 Nov, 2003 10:34 pm
I don't know who bunched all the southerns up but I know I am not in that bunch of southerns who would not allow or not be allowed to date a girl of another color.

The North started the war. The North marched through the South and burned homes, fields, live stock, raped, stole things and continued on their trek. The South did not attack the North. The South was on the defensive. They never marched through the North.

Neither side was right. They were both wrong. But after the war it was the South who suffered, and it still suffers now. There were couple of cities that would have been as big as New York had they not be burned.
0 Replies
Reply Tue 4 Nov, 2003 10:57 pm
BPB, you and I need to talk some time, my ex was in a similar situation to yours, and much time and thought has passed since.

Biases abound among all of us to this day, both in north and south and way more, east and west and yups and rednecks and ... well, let me not get started, the finesse of bias is very articulate, multiple and multiplying.

Most every point of view has good data for back up.
I am a norteamericano woman of irish descent who is very interested in italian history (for similar reasons to the foundation of this thread) with a niece whose mother is from Liberia/dad irish am, and exspouse who wrote about the south shortly after growing up in south LA.

I'd rather see what we care about together, and not just a point of view from the rather solopsistic US. Given a certain amount of perspective and maturity (equation? nah!), people will pick a lively society with economy that helps them, and lets them go out their front door to meet and greet and perhaps dance.
0 Replies
Reply Wed 5 Nov, 2003 05:38 am
My ancestors lived in Georgia during the Civil War. I am not sure whether they were slave owners or just poor trash. One thing for certain: I do not wish the south had won the war. I have spent the greater portion of my life pushing for civil rights for all, regardless of color or background. I think the originator of this thread is way too biased to see the facts clearly and I agree with those who call the discussion a waste of time.
0 Replies
Jesse James
Reply Sat 23 May, 2009 07:34 pm
This Texan never denied being a Southerner and every Texan I know is proud of not only being Texan but of being Southern.
Reply Sat 23 May, 2009 10:25 pm
@Jesse James,
Jesse James wrote:

This Texan never denied being a Southerner and every Texan I know is proud of not only being Texan but of being Southern.

But are you also racist and proud of it? Do you consider African Americans to be less than human? Or any other races for that matter?
0 Replies
Reply Sun 24 May, 2009 05:51 am
@Jesse James,
Most texans I know are too smart to stand around spouting Yay texas as if where they live defines who they are..
0 Replies
Below viewing threshold (view)
Reply Sat 30 May, 2009 01:01 pm
Good for you.

Here's a cookie for you, cracker.
0 Replies
Reply Mon 1 Jun, 2009 06:49 am
Michelle Obama - racist.
Sonia Sotomayor - racist
Eric Holder - racist
Barack Hussein Obama - Not even a citizen, not the president, but a racist.
Reply Mon 1 Jun, 2009 08:00 am
It's good to have you back, ceej. We missed your unique brand of crazy around here.
Reply Mon 1 Jun, 2009 08:02 am
Stating facts is only "crazy" when you're in a room full of idiots.
Reply Mon 1 Jun, 2009 08:04 am
Room full of idiots? Are you referring to one of your family reunions?
0 Replies

Related Topics

WIND AND WATER - Discussion by Setanta
Who ordered the construction of the Berlin Wall? - Discussion by Walter Hinteler
True version of Vlad Dracula, 15'th century - Discussion by gungasnake
ONE SMALL STEP . . . - Discussion by Setanta
History of Gun Control - Discussion by gungasnake
Where did our notion of a 'scholar' come from? - Discussion by TuringEquivalent
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 08/14/2020 at 11:18:41