University of North Carolina Students Topple Confederate Monument

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: introvert
Don't be such a tease.

Well, I do declare, Mr. Introvert, that I am not teasing, I am as serious as Silent Sam's expression in the matter.

Stop it.

You had me at viagra.

No need to get us all worked up.

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: Freeborn

Some people think the civil war was only about slavery.

It couldn't have been.

They don't even acknowledge what they did to the brown man.

The war would be fought to prevent those states from seceding, not to destroy the institution of slavery.

www.huffingtonpost.com...

The North was so prejudice that white people acutally discriminated against other white people. So you can bet that life was not a bowl of cherries for nonwhites. And for blacks, the 19th century was nothing but a bowl of crap, no matter where you lived.

www.cracked.com...

Throw in a splash of Copperheads.

en.wikipedia.org...(politics)

a reply to: TinySickTears

A bunch of bigots used their anti-White hatred and racism to destroy historic art.

Simple solution to the statue debate.

Make all the contentious statues life sized and put them at ground level. We keep the history without the aggrandisement.

a reply to: neo96

I'm sorry, where did we ever say that the North was totally awesome and without its own flaws? Furthermore, where did we mention what the North's motivations for fighting were?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Everyone already figured that out with the Trail of Tears, and Native American Genocide after 'winning'.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

They're the ones who stand around the water cooler and analyze why this or that show on TV is "problematic" from their safe little PC/SJW standpoint, not because they came up with that analysis themselves but because this or that pop-website told them so.

gee, change a few words in that statement and it could easily be talking about the christians and how they gather to discuss what is and isn't suitable within our kid's textbooks.. only they've been known to have the power to actually determine what is or isn't in your kid's textbooks.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Everyone already figured that out with the Trail of Tears, and Native American Genocide after 'winning'.

Oh look. It's a patented Neo deflection. First we were talking about a statue, then neo wants us to talk about the south's motivations for fighting the war, just recently he deflects to tell us the north's motivations to fight the war, and NOW we get to talk about native americans and the Trail of Tears. Have I followed your forum ADD properly Neo?

a reply to: Krazysh0t


You left out historical revision on Saddam's statue.

While condemning the South over slavery remember it was an American institution legal in all 13 colonies at the founding. If we can condemn Southern states over it then every state at the founding is also guilty. This is cultural Marxism tearing down everything about Western civilization that doesn't fit their politically correct narrative of oppressed peoples. The genius of the Constitution is that it allowed for a legal means to do things like end slavery and grant equal rights to all people. This is unique in the world and a thing to be treasured.

Without the Constitution our history would be far different; any group that was a "problem" to the growing colonies would simply have been exterminated. Slavery's end likely would have resulted in the mass killing of former slaves rather than granting them freedom or sending them to Liberia. The process has been slow but progressively forward in granting equality to all. That is the genius of the founding fathers and the Constitution, the single issue which if we cannot agree to then we no longer have a country but a nation at war internally.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Oh yeah! We had to prove that Americans have supported Americans tearing down statues in the past. It's like a puzzle trying to follow neo's train of thought.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I don't call not ignoring Native American genocide a deflection.

Same historical time period.

a reply to: Krazysh0t


I'm good at 4-D chess so this is like tic-tac-toe to me.

a reply to: Asktheanimals

Slavery was a concession that the North made to the South so they'd remain in the Union. While the north had states guilty of it too, it was more or less required to be in the Constitution because Southern states held the Constitutional signing process hostage. This action inspired the eventual Civil War by giving the Southern states a legal argument to defend slavery. The South also went on to hold the North hostage for further slavery concessions (such as the Missouri Compromise) by threatening to secede if they didn't get their way.

If you want to make a parallel to today, it was very similar to the take no prisoners politics the right engages in now. There was even an echo chamber of self-fulfilling paranoia and propaganda fueling this idea that the North was coming after the South that justified in their eyes the politics of the day.

However, the North wasn't perfect either. Plus there were revolutionaries like John Brown and his raid that further played into the South's fears. Then there were citizens taking matters into their own hands. Northerners violated laws requiring people to return escaped slaves. Kind of like college students vandalizing a statue to express their dissatisfaction with the status of the day.

In the end, things were complicated. Villains and heroes are never cut and dry and history is always a series of fights, compromises and concessions. This is why the President is wrong. Nuance is VERY important.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I don't call not ignoring Native American genocide a deflection.

Same historical time period.

You can't just tangentially bring up a point that is unrelated to the thread topic and accuse people of ignoring it neo. That's a rather large fallacy.

Lincoln intended to deport them.

Of course he got shot before we could ever find out if he would.

www.telegraph.co.uk...

a reply to: Krazysh0t

In the end, things were complicated. Villains and heroes are never cut and dry and history is always a series of fights, compromises and concessions.

tearing down statues is not?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Let's dumb it down for you.

Why was the black mans life more important than the brown mans?

Remember the civil war was over 'slavery'.

Slavery bad.

Genocide good.

Look at the bright side everyone, at least they're not giving kids water or milk if we forget to ask for soda.