We Knew it was coming: NAACP wants Stone Mountain CARVING removed.

a reply to: FormOfTheLord

And Lincoln wanted to deport them.

a reply to: Liquesence

Wow these people have lost their friggin minds,I love this country and these scumbags in human skin suits are warping everything.

originally posted by: Beach Bum
a reply to: Liquesence

Wow these people have lost their friggin minds,I love this country and these scumbags in human skin suits are warping everything.

The only scum are the people that honor slavery.

a reply to: phishfriar47

Alright I will respond to you and kindy take my leave from this thread. This topic is a very emotional one. I think many people keep over looking the point. I don't agree with everything the naacp represents I do not agree with all their cases, but asking to remove a symbol to them that represents a bad time in their lives is not allot to ask for. It is kind of shocking in my opinion if I lived in a state and was black and was a symbol at my state parks and capitol that had flags or monuments that represented a culture at that time that disagreed with freeing them and fought over it passionately. That is all I am saying I am not ashamed of my American history I regret some of the events that occurred but we grew up thru history we did our best to right wrongs morally. So in my mind the Confederate flag was moral decision how clumsily it was made or not does not matter. If African Americans do not like this flag I don't blame them and asking for them and the symbolism to be removed on civil government property to me is right. Will it happen doubtful do I think it is rewriting history removing these symbols no. If you want to fly the flag on your property vehicles etc. So be it it's your right your heritage etc. That is all. Just kind of think about it pretend to be black etc.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: NavyDoc
Probably because most of us hadn't heard of it. You can't point to people discussing something that is national news and call them hypocrites for not discussing something that wasn't national news. I for one have not heard of this Oklahoma issue.

It certainly WAS national news.
CNN
Huff Po
Washington Post

Hey look, it was even discussed on ATS.

Oklahoma is not in the South, so I don't get the jab against Southerners.

It's about defending history in general, regardless of whether it is culturally important to your region of the US. Besides, Oklahoma is DEFINITELY in the south according to every measure we've invented to determine Southern states (Missouri Compromise and the Mason Dixon line).

The article you posted is rather biased and full of leftist hyperbole but I do see where its mentioned that the educators in Oklahoma were objecting to the course's contents. I've taken many a history course and sometimes they are indeed biased and painting the US as the root of all evil is one of the biases I've seen. Is it possible, just maybe, that they were objecting to a course they thought as biased?

Lol ya right. The teachers thought this was a terrible idea too. But hey, maybe you are right. After all, we all know that politicians ALWAYS know better than SME's right?

You present a false dichotomy. "If you don't bitch about completely unrelated event A, you can't bitch about completely unrelated event B."

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord

originally posted by: Beach Bum
a reply to: Liquesence

Wow these people have lost their friggin minds,I love this country and these scumbags in human skin suits are warping everything.

The only scum are the people that honor slavery.

Its a open air museum in actuality. so technically its in a museum where it belongs. HAtred of a hater begats more hate btw.

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord

originally posted by: Beach Bum
a reply to: Liquesence

Wow these people have lost their friggin minds,I love this country and these scumbags in human skin suits are warping everything.

The only scum are the people that honor slavery.

Its a open air museum in actuality. so technically its in a museum where it belongs. HAtred of a hater begats more hate btw.

Its in honor of generals that fought for slavery, on public property. Put the monument on your private property not in a public museum funded by our tax dollors. We the people do not honor slavery nor do we honor its history with monuments to those who fought for slavery against all common sense.

If its on public land it has to go, put it on private land dont make us pay to honor barbarisms like slavery and those who fought to support and maintain it.

a reply to: NavyDoc

Isn't the argument about preserving history? Well, why the selective outrage for when history is under attack by people looking to censor it? I'm not creating a false premise at all. Republicans have, in the past, shown to distort history over and over and over.

Then ALL of a sudden when something they treasure (for which the reasons they treasure are based on white washed lies THEY spread) is under assault, all of a sudden history becomes important to them. It is hypocrisy at its finest. The right hasn't cared about real history for a long time, and I doubt they care about it now with this issue.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: NavyDoc

Isn't the argument about preserving history? Well, why the selective outrage for when history is under attack by people looking to censor it? I'm not creating a false premise at all. Republicans have, in the past, shown to distort history over and over and over.

Then ALL of a sudden when something they treasure (for which the reasons they treasure are based on white washed lies THEY spread) is under assault, all of a sudden history becomes important to them. It is hypocrisy at its finest. The right hasn't cared about real history for a long time, and I doubt they care about it now with this issue.

Oooookay...riiight.

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord

originally posted by: Beach Bum
a reply to: Liquesence

Wow these people have lost their friggin minds,I love this country and these scumbags in human skin suits are warping everything.

The only scum are the people that honor slavery.

HAtred of a hater begats more hate btw.

Perhaps we all need to learn to love each other. . .
Till then I will try to love the scum of the earth. . . . .

a reply to: Liquesence

Those who deny historical events and happenings, either deliberately or through ignorance, will most certainly be doomed to repeat those historical happening at some future date.

With talk of states seceding from the union, eradicating all symbols of past conflict, angst and alternative ideology isn't the smartest move that could have been made.

A smarter move would have been to keep the CF intact and then set it up to be ridiculed and generally poked fun at...eradicating a flag or banner doesn't do anything to lessen the emotive forces behind those symbols...humiliation works much better.

a reply to: NavyDoc
First off, this isn't directed to anyone in particular. I'm new here and not very tech savvy, so I just put this onto the last post.

Now if you've never been to Stone Mountain, you cannot know how beautiful that carving is. I've never been to Mt Rushmore, but I'll bet there are people who disagree with the presidents carved on that and would want them removed.
I think there must be some way to save this art, maybe by changing the faces of the men riding horses to keep those
who object from being reminded of a time in our country's past that shouldn't be forgotten. The outcome of that war
did make people free, I don't even remember the names of those generals on the horses, I just appreciated the vision of
the artist and the labor that made that carving.

a reply to: Cuervo

There is a clear distinction between flying an enemy flag on a state building and preserving a historical monument.

From what I've read the whole state building thing was sort of misrepresented. The flag was on a Civil War memorial, and the flag actually flying over the capital building was removed years ago.

originally posted by: irishhaf
a reply to: theantediluvian

Yes because being grabbed forcefully and move to another land and forcing them to work is so different.

The English pretty much depopulation Ireland at one point..

Indentured servitude and chattel slavery are not the same thing. By most estimates, at least half of the white settlers to the thirteen colonies arriving from the 17th century through the Revolutionary War came as indentured servants. The typical duration of an indenture was four to seven years.

It certainly was a horrible business, rife with abuse. Indentured servants lived with harsh and oppressive restrictions, the work was more often than not back breaking farm labor and people were worked to death, women were often the victims of sexual abuse and rape and contracts were sometimes unfairly and unlawfully extended.

That said, there were profound, obvious differences from chattel slavery: Most indentured servants entered into their indentures willingly and there was a reasonable expectation that after the duration of the indenture was complete, if a person survived the labor, diseases, malnutrition and attacks by Natives, he would be a free citizen and it was common for the contracts to stipulate "freedom dues" that were paid at its termination. These dues would often be land, provisions and arms. Most importantly, indentured servants were still considered people, they had names that are recorded in tax rolls and early censuses, they had rights and legal recourse in courts of law. Murdering them was a crime. Their children were not born the property of their masters.

The conditions in the Caribbean were particularly horrible and in many cases "white slavery" would be the appropriate term, but to conflate indentured servitude and chattel slavery in mainland North America is to be completely ignorant of history.

Stop trying to minimize slavery by rewriting history.

a reply to: fshrrex

Heck. Now they're going to want to tear down Pike's Peak.

originally posted by: Domo1
a reply to: Cuervo

There is a clear distinction between flying an enemy flag on a state building and preserving a historical monument.

From what I've read the whole state building thing was sort of misrepresented. The flag was on a Civil War memorial, and the flag actually flying over the capital building was removed years ago.

That is correct.
Interestingly, the State Senator that was shot at the church by Dylan Roof voted for the flag to to fly at that memorial.

a reply to: Liquesence

Maybe someone should start a campaign to ban the NAACP because they are in fact a racist organization that is inclusive and based around blacks.




By the same logic they are using the organization should be banned or integrated with a focus on all races.........See what I did......I used progressive logic and turned it around back at them.......YA.

a reply to: Liquesence

The liberals jumped on this anti-confederate bandwagon because it was a fad. Before it became a fad, few of them had strong opinions about it.

I don't think it is okay to destroy monuments and historical sites just because people these days don't agree with how things worked in the past. I agree with the O.P. Especially digging up graves is very dishonorable. People could have been perfectly acceptable according to their culture in past and it is unfair to judge them from the perspective of another culture that they had no experience in.

Let the historical monuments and graves be, and disagree with them. There is no need to destroy them. Liberals love destroying whatever doesn't agree with their viewpoints, and apparently this is no different.

What gets me the most is that this is an emotional reaction, not reasonable action.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: NavyDoc

Isn't the argument about preserving history? Well, why the selective outrage for when history is under attack by people looking to censor it? I'm not creating a false premise at all. Republicans have, in the past, shown to distort history over and over and over.

Then ALL of a sudden when something they treasure (for which the reasons they treasure are based on white washed lies THEY spread) is under assault, all of a sudden history becomes important to them. It is hypocrisy at its finest. The right hasn't cared about real history for a long time, and I doubt they care about it now with this issue.

I am actually a liberal who doesn't like the idea of destroying history in either case. So I defy your point. I definitely dislike it when Republicans try to modify textbooks and I definitely dislike it when liberals try to destroy historical monuments because they aren't politically correct.

a reply to: theantediluvian

I suggest you read up on irish history, some came over by choice many more were forced.

You can give it an offical name but forcing people out of their homes forcing them to move, then forcing them to work for you is slavery in my book.

I know what American history books say, I know what English history books say, and I know what my family's history was... Foley clan from Waterford Ireland, my ancestors were not given a choice.