Memphis : The Nathan Bedford Forrest Statue controversy

(The set up)
For those of you not in the mid-south or America as a whole, there has been a long standing debate over the appropriateness of confederate monuments. Is it smart to glorify rebellions? Is it revisionist history? Is it hiding the past?

Well there is no more notable nor controversial instance than both Nathan Bedford Forrest and the debate over his statue(s). In my mind he is both the best and worst case scenerio for both sides..

A man one part dirt poor white trash, one part monster,, one part brilliant tactician, part self made entrepreneur, part slave trader. Both respected and feared by his men and opponents alike.


Normally, I am personally against glorifying rebellions. I won't elaborate as not to drift too far off my intended topic, but needless to say I am anti confederacy.

That said Nathan Bedford Forrest as usual continues to muddy the waters by being undoubtably the best cavalry commander in American history and undoubtably in the top 25 military commanders in the history of planet earth...

A guy IMHO not quite on the level of say a Hannibal Barca, but in the tier right behind that....

(The actual Topic lol)

So assuming you literally have a guy who is in the top few handfuls of finest military minds in world history, does that change the math???

I personally am against glorifying the confederacy as a whole, but I think it might change things if your talking about the finest warrior in American history...

(Conclusion)

I was startled to find Forrest on random " top commanders in history" lists, but after researching his exploits it is hard to argue he deserves his spot.

Though I doubt southern apologists will argue with anything but my opinion that the south were traitors, but this isn't for them.

This is for those (like myself) who don't agree with sucession nor the "lost cause" mythos.

Does it change the debate if the person in question was literally in the same rank as Marc Anthony and leonidas???

Just rename it Forest Gump.
No one can be angry at that.

Silly fell good BS, we must continue to recognize the past so not to repeat it. Yup Natzis in Germany, Stalin in Russia, let's not even start on about Africa. Hide our heads in the sand? Or understand our history and learn from it. This is not glorification of slavery or the confederacy.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

As someone who spent many years in and around Memphis,I have to say that complaining about the Forrest statue is like super ultimate Bruce Lee type kicking of a dead horse.

People try to use the statue as a reason for the extreme escalation of murders committed by blacks in Memphis (especially this year) to ignore the elephant in the room.

Look at our murder rates this year-and ask yourself why you are wasting your time arguing about a pile of stones when there are blacks murdering each other because of a thug lifestyle choice.


I won't post a link because I know that you will immediately attack the source-no matter where it comes from.(Alinsky's rules)


If black lives and "racism" actually matter to you-physically go into Memphis and take the guns out of the black thugs hands to stop them from killing each other.By doing ANYTHING LESS you are merely pretending to be a social justice warrior and wasting time,trying to make yourself appear to be cultured.

originally posted by: testingtesting
Just rename it Forest Gump.
No one can be angry at that.

Nah, he has proven himself to be a part of the Patriarchy by being so successful. How else would a mentally handicapped guy get so far?

Thats right, White Privilege.


/sarcasm

originally posted by: WUNK22
Silly fell good BS, we must continue to recognize the past so not to repeat it. Yup Natzis in Germany, Stalin in Russia, let's not even start on about Africa. Hide our heads in the sand? Or understand our history and learn from it. This is not glorification of slavery or the confederacy.

I think it is a fine line any civilization is walking when talking about rebellions and controversial factions . A line which anyone flying the flag or making monuments to lesser rebels IMHO is crossing.

However , in the nearly unique instances in history. Where you literally had an Eisenstein in their chosen field.


Maybe more similar to Werner von bron in WW2.. a brilliance you can't replace or duplicate...

How long was it before Hannibal was revered in Rome?

Is Rommel considered a hero in Germany or Europe today?

Wow first intelligent reply I've had in a long, long time! Rommel was a great tactician, the teach about him in West Point, wrong side I guess. Thank you for the replya reply to: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

(The set up)
For those of you not in the mid-south or America as a whole, there has been a long standing debate over the appropriateness of confederate monuments. Is it smart to glorify rebellions? Is it revisionist history? Is it hiding the past?

Well there is no more notable nor controversial instance than both Nathan Bedford Forrest and the debate over his statue(s). In my mind he is both the best and worst case scenerio for both sides..

A man one part dirt poor white trash, one part monster,, one part brilliant tactician, part self made entrepreneur, part slave trader. Both respected and feared by his men and opponents alike.


Normally, I am personally against glorifying rebellions. I won't elaborate as not to drift too far off my intended topic, but needless to say I am anti confederacy.

That said Nathan Bedford Forrest as usual continues to muddy the waters by being undoubtably the best cavalry commander in American history and undoubtably in the top 25 military commanders in the history of planet earth...

A guy IMHO not quite on the level of say a Hannibal Barca, but in the tier right behind that....

(The actual Topic lol)

So assuming you literally have a guy who is in the top few handfuls of finest military minds in world history, does that change the math???

I personally am against glorifying the confederacy as a whole, but I think it might change things if your talking about the finest warrior in American history...

(Conclusion)

I was startled to find Forrest on random " top commanders in history" lists, but after researching his exploits it is hard to argue he deserves his spot.

Though I doubt southern apologists will argue with anything but my opinion that the south were traitors, but this isn't for them.

This is for those (like myself) who don't agree with sucession nor the "lost cause" mythos.

Does it change the debate if the person in question was literally in the same rank as Marc Anthony and leonidas???

Disclaimer: Black guy. Grew up in south.

If it is part of history, it should remain. At some point, you just have to kind of let stuff go. I remember as a kid going to Stone Mountain, GA for BBQs and other things. They have the big Confederate Memorial Carving... the largest in the world. Laser show, fireworks et al. Plenty of black folks used to come see the big show.

The problem is where do you draw the line? History is full of heros and villains. The line isn't always clear.

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
How long was it before Hannibal was revered in Rome?

Always respected, never revered.

Scipio was revered.

a reply to: WUNK22

Forrest and Rommel like many other good leaders, being on the losing side were condemned to villainy.

originally posted by: angryproctologist
a reply to: JoshuaCox

As someone who spent many years in and around Memphis,I have to say that complaining about the Forrest statue is like super ultimate Bruce Lee type kicking of a dead horse.

People try to use the statue as a reason for the extreme escalation of murders committed by blacks in Memphis (especially this year) to ignore the elephant in the room.

Look at our murder rates this year-and ask yourself why you are wasting your time arguing about a pile of stones when there are blacks murdering each other because of a thug lifestyle choice.


I won't post a link because I know that you will immediately attack the source-no matter where it comes from.(Alinsky's rules)


If black lives and "racism" actually matter to you-physically go into Memphis and take the guns out of the black thugs hands to stop them from killing each other.By doing ANYTHING LESS you are merely pretending to be a social justice warrior and wasting time,trying to make yourself appear to be cultured.

Murder rates have constantly dropped maybe it's up a hair from last year , but 2013 was the safest year for everyone in its history..police included.


I made no mention of slavery, instead calling the south traitors...

You literally had to do backflips in an attempt to change the topic from something not political, into a politicsl issue totally irrelevant to anything discussed.....


You are the only one saying BLM is motivated by confederate monuments..

Oh and if you don't have a link to a real life accredited news organization, its prob some BS made up by some random liberal in his basement..

Because all the pizza gate type stuff has been from a couple liberals in their moms basments trolling conservatives to see how much nonsense they will actually believe..

Hint: they will literally believe anything..


I mean come on?!?!

Hillary clinton secretly runs a pedophile ring out of a local pizza shops basement, when the pizza shop doesn't even have a basement.

Y

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
How long was it before Hannibal was revered in Rome?

Always respected, never revered.

Scipio was revered.

Not so much.. you gotta think the Roman senate and mob turned on scipio...

His tomb stone even read:

" no man did more for Rome and no man receives less in return."

I'm just guessing, but I bet not long after Carthage was destroyed, revisionist history had them all as marketing tools.

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

(The set up)
For those of you not in the mid-south or America as a whole, there has been a long standing debate over the appropriateness of confederate monuments. Is it smart to glorify rebellions? Is it revisionist history? Is it hiding the past?

Well there is no more notable nor controversial instance than both Nathan Bedford Forrest and the debate over his statue(s). In my mind he is both the best and worst case scenerio for both sides..

A man one part dirt poor white trash, one part monster,, one part brilliant tactician, part self made entrepreneur, part slave trader. Both respected and feared by his men and opponents alike.


Normally, I am personally against glorifying rebellions. I won't elaborate as not to drift too far off my intended topic, but needless to say I am anti confederacy.

That said Nathan Bedford Forrest as usual continues to muddy the waters by being undoubtably the best cavalry commander in American history and undoubtably in the top 25 military commanders in the history of planet earth...

A guy IMHO not quite on the level of say a Hannibal Barca, but in the tier right behind that....

(The actual Topic lol)

So assuming you literally have a guy who is in the top few handfuls of finest military minds in world history, does that change the math???

I personally am against glorifying the confederacy as a whole, but I think it might change things if your talking about the finest warrior in American history...

(Conclusion)

I was startled to find Forrest on random " top commanders in history" lists, but after researching his exploits it is hard to argue he deserves his spot.

Though I doubt southern apologists will argue with anything but my opinion that the south were traitors, but this isn't for them.

This is for those (like myself) who don't agree with sucession nor the "lost cause" mythos.

Does it change the debate if the person in question was literally in the same rank as Marc Anthony and leonidas???

Disclaimer: Black guy. Grew up in south.

If it is part of history, it should remain. At some point, you just have to kind of let stuff go. I remember as a kid going to Stone Mountain, GA for BBQs and other things. They have the big Confederate Memorial Carving... the largest in the world. Laser show, fireworks et al. Plenty of black folks used to come see the big show.

The problem is where do you draw the line? History is full of heros and villains. The line isn't always clear.

I think that's kinda easy..just tell the truth..


For example, the monument might read:

" rebelled against his country, leading to the deaths of tens of thousands of US service members. However, might have been the most skilled Cavelry commander in US history. Who's exploits are still taught in military academies to this day. "

No one espeacially glorifies achellies character.. that's not who he was. Achellies was the anchient world's most beautifully, deadly weapon of mass destruction..(stolen from "the Trojan war podcast")


Not a fun dude to play Magic against lol.

IMHO Forrest was the same..

A fairly dispicable human being, who happened to be antebellum America's most deadly weapon of mass destruction.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

That was more politicking by his adversaries in the Senate than a overall dislike by the citizenry. During the alleged bribery trial revolving around Antiochus the people rallied around him and he was eventually acquitted.

originally posted by: Butterfinger

originally posted by: testingtesting
Just rename it Forest Gump.
No one can be angry at that.

Nah, he has proven himself to be a part of the Patriarchy by being so successful. How else would a mentally handicapped guy get so far?

Thats right, White Privilege.


/sarcasm

Well it was kinda crappy that if you look at some bumbling mentally disabled white guy was secretly the sole motivating force for ALL of the civil rights movement...

It does kinda poop all over the real people (of all races) who fought and died for such things.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: JoshuaCox

That was more politicking by his adversaries in the Senate than a overall dislike by the citizenry. During the alleged bribery trial revolving around Antiochus the people rallied around him and he was eventually acquitted.

You gotta think Hannibal had a similar trend, even if his was a century later, long after the Roman dead had been forgotten..

Very similar to civil war history here. ....

Right after the war all the confederate flag type stuff was unheard of, but a century later.....the deaths were forgotten and revisionist history took over.

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
You gotta think Hannibal had a similar trend, even if his was a century later, long after the Roman dead had been forgotten..

Yes, even in the middle of the Second Punic War both Scipio and Hannibal were not liked by all of their country's respective leaders and obviously Hannibal found himself in an even more tenuous position in retirement than Scipio.

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

(The set up)
For those of you not in the mid-south or America as a whole, there has been a long standing debate over the appropriateness of confederate monuments. Is it smart to glorify rebellions? Is it revisionist history? Is it hiding the past?

Well there is no more notable nor controversial instance than both Nathan Bedford Forrest and the debate over his statue(s). In my mind he is both the best and worst case scenerio for both sides..

A man one part dirt poor white trash, one part monster,, one part brilliant tactician, part self made entrepreneur, part slave trader. Both respected and feared by his men and opponents alike.


Normally, I am personally against glorifying rebellions. I won't elaborate as not to drift too far off my intended topic, but needless to say I am anti confederacy.

That said Nathan Bedford Forrest as usual continues to muddy the waters by being undoubtably the best cavalry commander in American history and undoubtably in the top 25 military commanders in the history of planet earth...

A guy IMHO not quite on the level of say a Hannibal Barca, but in the tier right behind that....

(The actual Topic lol)

So assuming you literally have a guy who is in the top few handfuls of finest military minds in world history, does that change the math???

I personally am against glorifying the confederacy as a whole, but I think it might change things if your talking about the finest warrior in American history...

(Conclusion)

I was startled to find Forrest on random " top commanders in history" lists, but after researching his exploits it is hard to argue he deserves his spot.

Though I doubt southern apologists will argue with anything but my opinion that the south were traitors, but this isn't for them.

This is for those (like myself) who don't agree with sucession nor the "lost cause" mythos.

Does it change the debate if the person in question was literally in the same rank as Marc Anthony and leonidas???

Disclaimer: Black guy. Grew up in south.

If it is part of history, it should remain. At some point, you just have to kind of let stuff go. I remember as a kid going to Stone Mountain, GA for BBQs and other things. They have the big Confederate Memorial Carving... the largest in the world. Laser show, fireworks et al. Plenty of black folks used to come see the big show.

The problem is where do you draw the line? History is full of heros and villains. The line isn't always clear.

I think it's in how you do it.. you can teach history and not glorify traitors.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

" you can teach history and not glorify traitors"

The public schools will glorify the traitor and compulsive liar Barak Obama in future history lessons-but I'm sure that American ideal hating liberals will be all for it.

Unless a Trump presidency is the first step in the direction of removing the poison that is liberalism from schools,govt. institutions,etc.

originally posted by: angryproctologist
a reply to: JoshuaCox

" you can teach history and not glorify traitors"

The public schools will glorify the traitor and compulsive liar Barak Obama in future history lessons-but I'm sure that American ideal hating liberals will be all for it.

Unless a Trump presidency is the first step in the direction of removing the poison that is liberalism from schools,govt. institutions,etc.

You mean the poison that is logic, science and history. Rather than Christian creationism and southern apologetics gight??

You do know that America's present flavor of right wing conservatism is the laughing stock of the world...

Everyone else's hostorians... everyone else's scientists, everyone else's media, everyone else's political figures...against less than half of America's...

If everyone else thinks your crazy, it might not be everyone else that is wrong.

Batak OBAMA was only a traitor in rightwing world.. and your hoping that the guy who Russia wanted elected will save the world.. hilarious