Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

This purge, weeks ago passed the point of ridiculousness:

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/07/14/atlanta-naacp-chapter-calls-for-removal-massive-confederate-sculpture-in-public/

Yeah well good luck with that. A giant sculpture, even if it might depict less than admirable individuals somewhat, is a very different thing from flags on the local court house.

Nothing to see here but the NAACP overreaching once again where it doesn't really need to. Move along.

Well, the city council in Memphis, TN wants to move Nathan Bedford Forrest's remains...
http://www.localmemphis.com/story/d/story/council-votes-to-move-nathan-bedford-forrests-rema/12440/x-aa6bzx80iy91LMR_yQ-g

Some of these need to come down.

Many of them were erected for the wrong reasons, and glorifying people who were Traitors, and allied to/fighting for a cause that was based upon an evil foundation is not something we should be honoring or glorifying.

Correcting mistakes of the past is what nations need to do in order to move past those mistakes.

As long as we continue to honor the Confederacy as any type of "Heroic figures" we will remain fighting the Civil War.

The South Lost. It is time we reinforced that fact.

MB

I disagree- they were still people, and had their own heroic moments. Not all who died for the Confederacy were evil monsters, nor all who fought for the Union saints. Keeping them in our minds reminds us that they were all people, good or bad.

Well considering that forrest is the closest you will get to a legit war criminal in the civil war and the first grand wizard/possible founder of the KKK I really don't see the problem moving his remains.

 Sinful Hero wrote:
I disagree- they were still people, and had their own heroic moments. Not all who died for the Confederacy were evil monsters, nor all who fought for the Union saints. Keeping them in our minds reminds us that they were all people, good or bad.

So, this is a "Not all Nazis were Monsters" excuse?

It does not matter whether they were personally saints (although NONE were saints given they knew what they were fighting for).

Like those "Good men" fighting for the Third Reich, they lost any right to be celebrated by choosing to fight for a side that was based upon an evil premise or foundation.

They were fighting for a cause that was wrong.

They belong ONLY in Museums, and history books, NOT on monuments celebrating anything about them at all (no matter how good of a person they were).


And, as has been pointed out, Nathan Bedford Forrest was the founder of the KKK.

Like ALL of the other Confederates, he was fighting for a system that was based upon the premise that some men are created by God to be owned by others (who were chosen by God to lead the world).

Nathan Forrest just refused to stop fighting for what he believed in. It isn't like the other Confederates suddenly changed their minds simply because they lost. They remained people who believed they should be allowed to own human beings as slaves. They just lost any ability to do so.

And we should not be celebrating ANYONE who fought for the Confederacy, which was created in order to preserve and expand the institution of slavery.

MB

BeAfraid wrote:
Some of these need to come down.

Many of them were erected for the wrong reasons, and glorifying people who were Traitors, and allied to/fighting for a cause that was based upon an evil foundation is not something we should be honoring or glorifying.

Correcting mistakes of the past is what nations need to do in order to move past those mistakes.

As long as we continue to honor the Confederacy as any type of "Heroic figures" we will remain fighting the Civil War.

The South Lost. It is time we reinforced that fact.

MB

The same could be said of Washington and the other founding fathers had they lost the Revolutionary War.

Pro tip, they won so fake scenarios dont matter.

BeAfraid wrote:

 Sinful Hero wrote:
I disagree- they were still people, and had their own heroic moments. Not all who died for the Confederacy were evil monsters, nor all who fought for the Union saints. Keeping them in our minds reminds us that they were all people, good or bad.

So, this is a "Not all Nazis were Monsters" excuse?

It does not matter whether they were personally saints (although NONE were saints given they knew what they were fighting for).

Like those "Good men" fighting for the Third Reich, they lost any right to be celebrated by choosing to fight for a side that was based upon an evil premise or foundation.

They were fighting for a cause that was wrong.

They belong ONLY in Museums, and history books, NOT on monuments celebrating anything about them at all (no matter how good of a person they were).


And, as has been pointed out, Nathan Bedford Forrest was the founder of the KKK.

Like ALL of the other Confederates, he was fighting for a system that was based upon the premise that some men are created by God to be owned by others (who were chosen by God to lead the world).

Nathan Forrest just refused to stop fighting for what he believed in. It isn't like the other Confederates suddenly changed their minds simply because they lost. They remained people who believed they should be allowed to own human beings as slaves. They just lost any ability to do so.

And we should not be celebrating ANYONE who fought for the Confederacy, which was created in order to preserve and expand the institution of slavery.

MB

You're assuming every soldier who fought for the Confederacy did so to support slavery. The fact is, all have many different reasons to fight. Robert E. Lee for example fought out of allegiance to his home state, despite his desire to keep the union intact.

Slavery/the aspiration to own slaves was a major reason.

 Ustrello wrote:
Pro tip, they won so fake scenarios dont matter.

Pro tip, it was a very real possibility this would have happened, since they were being called traitors by the British and a good portion of their countrymen.

Relapse wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:
Pro tip, they won so fake scenarios dont matter.

Pro tip, it was a very real possibility this would have happened, since they were being called traitors by the British and a good portion of their countrymen.

They won so it literally does not matter, the south lost so they are traitors. Welcome to the real world.

 Ustrello wrote:
Slavery/the aspiration to own slaves was a major reason.

I have a books worth of Civil war letters that give other major reasons also, such as state's rights. You also ignore the fact that slave holders in the Revolutionary War were fighting for the right to keep slaves while the British were freeing them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ustrello wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:
Pro tip, they won so fake scenarios dont matter.

Pro tip, it was a very real possibility this would have happened, since they were being called traitors by the British and a good portion of their countrymen.

They won so it literally does not matter, the south lost so they are traitors. Welcome to the real world.

Welcome to the world of historical rewrites, you mean, ignoring facts.

Relapse wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:
Slavery/the aspiration to own slaves was a major reason.

I have a books worth of Civil war letters that give other major reasons also, such as state's rights. You also ignore the fact that slave holders in the Revolutionary War were fighting for the right to keep slaves while the British were freeing them.

The states right to have slaves, look at the declarations of secession most of them mention slavery in the first line or first few lines.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Relapse wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:
Slavery/the aspiration to own slaves was a major reason.

I have a books worth of Civil war letters that give other major reasons also, such as state's rights. You also ignore the fact that slave holders in the Revolutionary War were fighting for the right to keep slaves while the British were freeing them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ustrello wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:
Pro tip, they won so fake scenarios dont matter.

Pro tip, it was a very real possibility this would have happened, since they were being called traitors by the British and a good portion of their countrymen.

They won so it literally does not matter, the south lost so they are traitors. Welcome to the real world.

Welcome to the world of historical rewrites, you mean, ignoring facts.

Oh boy you mean the south didn't lose the civil war?

 Ustrello wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:
Pro tip, they won so fake scenarios dont matter.

Pro tip, it was a very real possibility this would have happened, since they were being called traitors by the British and a good portion of their countrymen.

They won so it literally does not matter, the south lost so they are traitors. Welcome to the real world.

"The Victors write the History" you mean. But they don't always write the truth.

[url]

 Ustrello wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:
Slavery/the aspiration to own slaves was a major reason.

I have a books worth of Civil war letters that give other major reasons also, such as state's rights. You also ignore the fact that slave holders in the Revolutionary War were fighting for the right to keep slaves while the British were freeing them.

The states right to have slaves, look at the declarations of secession most of them mention slavery in the first line or first few lines.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Relapse wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:
Slavery/the aspiration to own slaves was a major reason.

I have a books worth of Civil war letters that give other major reasons also, such as state's rights. You also ignore the fact that slave holders in the Revolutionary War were fighting for the right to keep slaves while the British were freeing them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ustrello wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:
Pro tip, they won so fake scenarios dont matter.

Pro tip, it was a very real possibility this would have happened, since they were being called traitors by the British and a good portion of their countrymen.

They won so it literally does not matter, the south lost so they are traitors. Welcome to the real world.

Welcome to the world of historical rewrites, you mean, ignoring facts.

Oh boy you mean the south didn't lose the civil war?

You know what I meant. Still waiting on your take on the Revolutionary War heroes fighting to keep their slaves, which you are trying to sidestep.

Something for you to read:

http://www.britannica.com/topic/The-Founding-Fathers-and-Slavery-1269536

http://www.revolutionary-war.net/slavery-and-the-revolutionary-war.html

Relapse wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:
Slavery/the aspiration to own slaves was a major reason.

I have a books worth of Civil war letters that give other major reasons also, such as state's rights. You also ignore the fact that slave holders in the Revolutionary War were fighting for the right to keep slaves while the British were freeing them.

The states right to have slaves, look at the declarations of secession most of them mention slavery in the first line or first few lines.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Relapse wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:
Slavery/the aspiration to own slaves was a major reason.

I have a books worth of Civil war letters that give other major reasons also, such as state's rights. You also ignore the fact that slave holders in the Revolutionary War were fighting for the right to keep slaves while the British were freeing them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ustrello wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:
Pro tip, they won so fake scenarios dont matter.

Pro tip, it was a very real possibility this would have happened, since they were being called traitors by the British and a good portion of their countrymen.

They won so it literally does not matter, the south lost so they are traitors. Welcome to the real world.

Welcome to the world of historical rewrites, you mean, ignoring facts.

Oh boy you mean the south didn't lose the civil war?

You know what I meant. Still waiting on your take on the Revolutionary War heroes fighting to keep their slaves, which you are trying to sidestep.

Oh yeah because slavery was the first thing people were fighting for, not the taxes and lack of rights. No siree bob it was about slaves first and foremost, I mean its not as if the founding fathers wrote about keeping slaves in the first line of the declaration of independence.

 Ustrello wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:
Slavery/the aspiration to own slaves was a major reason.

I have a books worth of Civil war letters that give other major reasons also, such as state's rights. You also ignore the fact that slave holders in the Revolutionary War were fighting for the right to keep slaves while the British were freeing them.

The states right to have slaves, look at the declarations of secession most of them mention slavery in the first line or first few lines.

The state governments issued those declarations- that doesn't necessarily mean the people in those states agreed with them. Many had various other reasons to go ahead and fight for the Confederacy.

 Ustrello wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:
Slavery/the aspiration to own slaves was a major reason.

I have a books worth of Civil war letters that give other major reasons also, such as state's rights. You also ignore the fact that slave holders in the Revolutionary War were fighting for the right to keep slaves while the British were freeing them.

The states right to have slaves, look at the declarations of secession most of them mention slavery in the first line or first few lines.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Relapse wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:
Slavery/the aspiration to own slaves was a major reason.

I have a books worth of Civil war letters that give other major reasons also, such as state's rights. You also ignore the fact that slave holders in the Revolutionary War were fighting for the right to keep slaves while the British were freeing them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ustrello wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:
Pro tip, they won so fake scenarios dont matter.

Pro tip, it was a very real possibility this would have happened, since they were being called traitors by the British and a good portion of their countrymen.

They won so it literally does not matter, the south lost so they are traitors. Welcome to the real world.

Welcome to the world of historical rewrites, you mean, ignoring facts.

Oh boy you mean the south didn't lose the civil war?

You know what I meant. Still waiting on your take on the Revolutionary War heroes fighting to keep their slaves, which you are trying to sidestep.

Oh yeah because slavery was the first thing people were fighting for, not the taxes and lack of rights. No siree bob it was about slaves first and foremost, I mean its not as if the founding fathers wrote about keeping slaves in the first line of the declaration of independence.

You should read history a little bit more carefully or speak with some of the British Dakka posters.

This purge, weeks ago passed the point of ridiculousness:

Oh, it's not good. Destroying own history is acting like aliens to their own country.
In Russia, it happen many times. During Peter I europesation, bolsheviks revolution, 1989-1991 events.
But in Finland they have Mannerheim, Alexander tsar and Lenin in almost same place and don't bother about it.
history should be remembered, not hated and erased

 Ustrello wrote:
Pro tip, they won so fake scenarios dont matter.

Saying "Pro Tip" really adds an air of respectability to your posts.

All of this is getting incredibly, incredibly tiresome.

 Sinful Hero wrote:
Well, the city council in Memphis, TN wants to move Nathan Bedford Forrest's remains...
http://www.localmemphis.com/story/d/story/council-votes-to-move-nathan-bedford-forrests-rema/12440/x-aa6bzx80iy91LMR_yQ-g

Didn't the Spanish Inquisition have a habit of doing that? Exhuming corpses in general I mean, not Nathan Bedford Forrest in particular.

It's probably not a good sign when society is heading back down that path.

 VorpalBunny74 wrote:

 Sinful Hero wrote:
Well, the city council in Memphis, TN wants to move Nathan Bedford Forrest's remains...
http://www.localmemphis.com/story/d/story/council-votes-to-move-nathan-bedford-forrests-rema/12440/x-aa6bzx80iy91LMR_yQ-g

Didn't the Spanish Inquisition have a habit of doing that? Exhuming corpses in general I mean, not Nathan Bedford Forrest in particular.

It's probably not a good sign when society is heading back down that path.

If I recall everything correctly, his family donated the land to the city on condition of his remains and such being kept there. They already changed the name of the park, which caused a ruckus itself. Of course they haven't dug him out yet- they still have several steps to proceed through before they get to that.

Look what happened in Russia: We had civil war too. And bolsheviks won.
"Winner writes history", yeah? And they rewrited history of Russia as it all way to communism utopia and tsarist Russia was evil. Actually It was, in some cases (90% uneducated and poor peasants). But bolsheviks used some historical bandits for propaganda, rewriting history as they were "fighters for freedom"
But in 1991 communists no more.
Again re-writing history?
How many times it should be rewrited and how many historical monuments should be destroyed? under the influence of momentary trends

 Freakazoitt wrote:

This purge, weeks ago passed the point of ridiculousness:

Oh, it's not good. Destroying own history is acting like aliens to their own country.
In Russia, it happen many times. During Peter I europesation, bolsheviks revolution, 1989-1991 events.
But in Finland they have Mannerheim, Alexander tsar and Lenin in almost same place and don't bother about it.
history should be remembered, not hated and erased

Welcome to the U.S in the 2010's, or any other point in time the mob is told what to believe.

Political Correctness has become a blight on humanity, so it may offend some people? Big deal, it happened, educate not eradicate history.

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
Political Correctness has become a blight on humanity, so it may offend some people? Big deal, it happened, educate not eradicate history.

Amen, brother.

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
Political Correctness has become a blight on humanity, so it may offend some people? Big deal, it happened, educate not eradicate history.

We live in a country where loser dads complain about a Slave Leia toy.

Par for the course.

The U.S. flag flew over a country where slavery was an institution for decades longer that a Confederate flag did.