The Confederacy was About Slavery

Hey Cam, where are you from?

This announcement comes on the heels of HBO confirming that they are developing the series “Confederate”:

Amazon is developing a drama series from Will Packer and Aaron McGruder that will deal with a post-slavery reparations America, Variety has confirmed.

The alt-history series will explore a world in which newly freed African Americans have secured the Southern states of Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama as reparations for slavery. The new nation, known as New Colonia, has a tumultuous relationship with the United States government.

If they pull it off, this will be a fantastic series, serving a very worthy purpose.

That's it, the devil is always in the detail.

UT takes down Confederate statues late Sunday night

By Lindsay Ellis, Houston Chronicle Updated 12:35 pm, Monday, August 21, 2017

Decades of tensions about the Confederate statues placed around the University of Texas at Austin's Main Mall culminated late Sunday in the quiet removal of life-size bronze figures of Confederate leaders.

The state flagship's president issued a harsh condemnation of modern white supremacy and neo-Nazism in a letter to campus late Sunday that announced his decision.

Minutes later, a spokesman confirmed that crews were in the process of taking down statues depicting Robert E. Lee, Albert Sidney Johnston, John Reagan and James Stephen Hogg.

The statues of Lee, Johnston and Reagan will be placed in the Briscoe Center for American History, a campus research center with exhibits on the American South.

The representation of Hogg, the former Texas governor, may be re-installed elsewhere on campus, President Greg Fenves said.

"We do not choose our history, but we choose what we honor and celebrate on our campus," Fenves wrote. "As UT students return in the coming week, I look forward to welcoming them here for a new academic year with a recommitment to an open, positive and inclusive learning environment for all."

He said that deadly violence in Charlottesville, Virginia earlier this month "made it clear, now more than ever, that Confederate monuments have become symbols of modern white supremacy and neo-Nazism."

Major George W. Littlefield, a former UT regent and Confederate officer, said in his will he wanted life-size statues of Jefferson Davis, Lee, Reagan, Hogg and Johnston placed around campus, according to a university task force that evaluated whether the statues should remain on campus in 2015.

His request, at the turn of the 20th Century, came during a period of white Southern nostalgia for the Confederacy. This "neo-Confederate" or "Lost Cause" movement, during which numerous Confederate monuments were erected across the South, paralleled the rise of the Ku Klux Klan and an upswing in discrimination and violence against people of color, the task force's report said.

That group was assembled shortly after a white supremacist killed nine black churchgoers in Charleston, S.C. UT-Austin later announced it would move a statue honoring Davis to a museum. At the time, Fenves said the other statues could stay because of the men's connections to Texas.

The statues have been subject to controversy since at least 1989.

New statues honoring Martin Luther King Jr., César Chávez and Barbara Jordan have been erected on campus over that time as alumni, faculty, administrators and students considered whether the Confederate monuments should stand. Debate raged through editorials in UT-Austin's alumni magazine and campus newspaper after acts of vandalism and task forces.

Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick criticized the university for removing the statues in the "middle of the night."

In a radio interview Monday morning, Patrick said while he does not tolerate bigotry and racism, tearing down statues sends "a poor message."

"I thought universities were where we were supposed to have robust discussions about our history," Patrick said. "Where does it stop?"

He also criticized the university for giving "no notice" on its plans to remove the statues, which UT-Austin spokesman J.B. Bird said was to minimize disruption to the community and to ensure public safety.

UT-Austin's decision follows Duke University's removal of a statue of Lee from the entrance of its chapel last week. That statue will also be preserved, Duke President Vincent Price said in a statement.

UH and Rice University have no statues or monuments honoring Confederate leaders, spokesmen for the universities said.

Texas A&M University hosts a statue of Lawrence Sullivan "Sul" Ross, a Confederate general, in its Academic Plaza. A campus building is named after Richard Coke, who fought for the Confederate Army.

A&M officials could not immediately say if there is a task force or group within the system or at the flagship considering the placement of these markers on campus.

Alejandra Matos contributed.

Lindsay Ellis writes about higher education for the Chronicle. You can follow her on Twitter and send her tips at [email protected].

The US civil war was about TWO kinds of slavery: ordinary slavery such as you read about in Uncle Tom's Cabin, and the slavery of the economic and commercial system of the British Empire and that second item was the main reason for the war.

https://larouchepac.com/20170324/friday-webcast

That issue has never been totally decided and remains the most major political issue in the world today. We defeated the British mililtary but, unfortunately, we have never defeated their monetary and banking system.

You had me until LaRouchepac.

You need to adjust your thinking. LPAC has gigantic major strengths and only two really major weaknesses to my knowledge. They are the very best private Intel agency in the world and the things which they actually are good at (economics, monetary theory and the history of money and banking, understanding the role of economics in American history, the American system of economics as practiced by other nations particularly Germany and Japan etc.), they are supremely good at.

In particular, the Chinese have been listening to LPAC for at least the last 30 years, as evidenced by any number of their marvelous technological accomplishments. The situation is similar to that of Edward Deming, who Americans refuse to listen to while Japanese did listen, and the consequent present domination of the auto industry by the Japanese.

The two weaknesses in the LPAC and picture as I see it...

Their approach to Islam, in my view, amounts to willful ignorance, and

There are a number of basic science questions which, again to my thinking, they are on the wrong side of; the impact of that would be that several of their ideas about science driver type projects, if implemented, could easily result in undesirable outcomes. An example would be the idea of prioritizing fusion power research over work on thorium reactors.

Got to admit, that's best thing you've ever written to support your argument.

I still disagree with you. I toyed with LaRuchery for about 10 minutes in the '92 election. Then I actually listened to LaRouche and met some LaRuchies. Cured me fast.

Like you wrote, just too much wooooooooo.

One of em is that Lyndon is bat **** crazy and senile. Whats the other??.

How does a Th reactor sustain a reaction to generate enough hat for a molten salt or water ractor? They have to bombard the trgets with neutrons to convert the Th to U 234. So, the added step(Th's dirty little secret) means that a Thorium ractor is still a Uranium fueled reactor. I used to be in favor of it , no more.
Where do e get the fst neutrons??? probablly fromU235, so w hve to beneficiate by the UF6 process anyway.

That he's dead?



What? Too soon?

Thing is, there is nobody close to being as good as they are at the things which they ARE good at. They have singlehandedly made Glass/Steagall into a household term, have played a major role in exposing Russia-gate for the bullshit that it is, and have reignited the discussion regarding the American System of Economics, amongst other things.

Did you check out LaRouche's wiki page?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyndon_LaRouche

One of the small problems I have with them is that they are self documenting themselves. Like the way the USSR used to do.

A couple elections back I attended a rally for a slate of candidates running for re-election. Some of LaRouche's drones were actually walking thru the seats trying to talk to attendees about the LaRouche crap. This wasn't a debate where all parties were pitching their spiel, only the Larouche followers were brazen or clueless enough to campaign while another party is speaking. I don't know if he was ever asked to leave but people were brushing him off.......it was surprising to me, but then again I don't go to political rallies very often. The other thing that was a surprise is while ticket holders were in line to get in, a group of people who supported another party stood about 30ft away and chanted insults and made rude gestures at us. It was weird.....but maybe that's what happens at these things.

I did enjoy listening to the speakers....that was actually uplifting......But in the future I'm going to pass on rallies, just worried it could be dangerous. I'll watch on television instead.

The ones I met in Omaha were well dressed, educated, about my age and almost inarticulate about LaRoucheism. They seemrd like cult members. You know, a little tired and underfed.

BZZZ!, wrong answer.

The main reason for the war was the Confederate states' desire to preserve and expand into the new territories the slavery of blacks in the US.

Robert E Lee
W. E. B. DuBois

Each year on the 19th of January there is renewed effort to canonize Robert E. Lee, the greatest confederate general. His personal comeliness, his aristocratic birth and his military prowess all call for the verdict of greatness and genius. But one thing–one terrible fact–militates against this and that is the inescapable truth that Robert E. Lee led a bloody war to perpetuate slavery. Copperheads like the New York Times may magisterially declare: “of course, he never fought for slavery.” Well, for what did he fight? State rights? Nonsense. The South cared only for State Rights as a weapon to defend slavery. If nationalism had been a stronger defense of the slave system than particularism, the South would have been as nationalistic in 1861 as it had been in 1812.

No. People do not go to war for abstract theories of government. They fight for property and privilege and that was what Virginia fought for in the Civil War. And Lee followed Virginia. He followed Virginia not because he particularly loved slavery (although he certainly did not hate it), but because he did not have the moral courage to stand against his family and his clan. Lee hesitated and hung his head in shame because he was asked to lead armies against human progress and Christian decency and did not dare refuse. He surrendered not to Grant, but to Negro Emancipation.

Today we can best perpetuate his memory and his nobler traits not by falsifying his moral debacle, but by explaining it to the young white south. What Lee did in 1861, other Lees are doing in 1928. They lack the moral courage to stand up for justice to the Negro because of the overwhelming public opinion of their social environment. Their fathers in the past have condoned lynching and mob violence, just as today they acquiesce in the disfranchisement of educated and worthy black citizens, provide wretchedly inadequate public schools for Negro children and endorse a public treatment of sickness, poverty and crime which disgraces civilization.

It is the punishment of the South that its Robert Lees and Jefferson Davises will always be tall, handsome and well-born. That their courage will be physical and not moral. That their leadership will be weak compliance with public opinion and never costly and unswerving revolt for justice and right. it is ridiculous to seek to excuse Robert Lee as the most formidable agency this nation ever raised to make 4 million human beings goods instead of men. Either he knew what slavery meant when he helped maim and murder thousands in its defense, or he did not. If he did not he was a fool. If he did, Robert Lee was a traitor and a rebel–not indeed to his country, but to humanity and humanity’s God.

Man, that DuBois guy sure could push a pencil.