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.

Didn't some donkey-cave call the cops in Connecticut because a military history store at a flea market was selling confederate and Nazi memorabilia?

People complained about slave Leia toy?

wot?

 MrDwhitey wrote:
People complained about slave Leia toy?

wot?

Yeah.

http://www.myfoxphilly.com/story/29539702/star-wars-action-figure-has-parents-furious

This is the world we live in.

 Freakazoitt wrote:
"Winner writes history"

Clearly, the winner isn't the only one who writes history. "The winner writes the history" is probably my least favorite piece of folk wisdom that is laughably untrue. With the exception of wars of total annihilation in which every man, woman, and child is put to the sword, followed by the salting of fields and the burning of every library, monument, and other record of a civilization, the only way in which the phrase "the winner writes the history" is true is if it is followed by "and so does the loser."

And if the line between "winner" and "loser" is even slightly blurry it's even better! Who writes the history if both sides think they won? (Answer: everybody!)

 Hordini wrote:

They not just writing history, but also re-writing what was already written.
And more sad - they destroying monuments! No matters who

Do we allow murderers and rapists their own gravestone? It is a monument for that person. You may not like it but their family deserves something to remember them by, somewhere to mourn their loss. Why? Because those people know them as people not just monsters. It is the same in the South. There are people who still trace their ancestry to the Civil war. They deserve something to remember those who defended their land from attack.

Relapse wrote:
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/

Purging history? LOL

You might as well argue that taking down the Berlin wall was purging history as well. That wall stood for 40 years, its their history and heritage. Given a few hundred more years it would have been as notable as the great wall of china. And America could of had a nice franchise of good German food at the Berlin wall buffet chains with a nice statue of Hitler to greet you.

But nope, Regan just had to go and purge history.

 Freakazoitt wrote:

 Hordini wrote:

They not just writing history, but also re-writing what was already written.
And more sad - they destroying monuments! No matters who

Spoiler:

The Duke boys wouldn't be out of place there either. No body thought twice about them in all the decades they were on tv, then suddenly the finger was pointed, someone screamed racist and they were purged.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

sirlynchmob wrote:

Relapse wrote:
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/

Purging history? LOL

You might as well argue that taking down the Berlin wall was purging history as well. That wall stood for 40 years, its their history and heritage. Given a few hundred more years it would have been as notable as the great wall of china. And America could of had a nice franchise of good German food at the Berlin wall buffet chains with a nice statue of Hitler to greet you.

But nope, Regan just had to go and purge history.

And it makes a great gift that people aren't afraid to market.

http://www.berlin-wall.net

 Freakazoitt wrote:

 Hordini wrote:

They not just writing history, but also re-writing what was already written.
And more sad - they destroying monuments! No matters who

Spoiler:

While I am deeply saddened at the destruction of historical structures and monuments like that, amazingly, we still have photos, books, records and history of all those things.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

sirlynchmob wrote:

Relapse wrote:
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/

Purging history? LOL

You might as well argue that taking down the Berlin wall was purging history as well. That wall stood for 40 years, its their history and heritage. Given a few hundred more years it would have been as notable as the great wall of china. And America could of had a nice franchise of good German food at the Berlin wall buffet chains with a nice statue of Hitler to greet you.

But nope, Regan just had to go and purge history.

The Berlin wall was a physical barrier dividing a city in half, separating families and friends. Statues and monuments, while they may cause emotional discomfort, don't represent the very real barrier that the Berlin wall functioned as. And, in fact, the Berlin wall is still standing in certain places in Berlin, because it is an important part of their history.

The monuments on stone Mountain are not going anywhere.
They are on a park that is Privately owned and maintained.

Forrest's family's graves and statue are also not going anywhere. The monument is protected by the heritage preservation act in Tennessee, and the graves cannot be moved without the family's permission, which they will not give.
Memphis city council, it turns out, were hoping to clean up the land so it could be sold to the university of Tennessee for a proposed 500 million expansion.

Are you aware that after one year as leader of the klan, Forrest ordered it to disband and denounced it as an ungovernable mob? Afterwards Forrest was like Scrooge on Christmas morning, providing funds and support for blacks to be able and allowed to attend college? He became such a champion of black rights that he was the first white man invited to speak in front of the (forerunner organization of) the NAACP.

"And I would've gotten away with it too, if it weren't for those meddling facts."

-NAACP

 snurl wrote:
The monuments on stone Mountain are not going anywhere.
They are on a park that is Privately owned and maintained.

Forrest's family's graves and statue are also not going anywhere. The monument is protected by the heritage preservation act in Tennessee, and the graves cannot be moved without the family's permission, which they will not give.
Memphis city council, it turns out, were hoping to clean up the land so it could be sold to the university of Tennessee for a proposed 500 million expansion.

Are you aware that after one year as leader of the klan, Forrest ordered it to disband and denounced it as an ungovernable mob? Afterwards Forrest was like Scrooge on Christmas morning, providing funds and support for blacks to be able and allowed to attend college? He became such a champion of black rights that he was the first white man invited to speak in front of the (forerunner organization of) the NAACP.

It's so much more straightforward if we can just use him as a bad guy though. The storyline about Nathan Bedford Forest ordering the Klan to disband and giving a speech about racial reconciliation is only in the ACW comics, which the average audience member hasn't read. Most Americans are only familiar with the ACW film universe, in which that subplot was cut. I think it makes sense, as nobody from the South really needs any character development to serve as a solid stock villain. I heard that George Lucas and Spike Lee are actually going to do a prequel trilogy anyway, in which the whole Civil War will be retconned, and the conflict streamlined to one set piece fight in which Abraham Lincoln and Captain Kirk have a lightsaber duel with Kahless and Nathan Bedford Forest.

Yes, it must be true that the victor writes the history (comic) books.

 Ustrello wrote:
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.

Uh, did you forget Sherman?

 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

I think this is wrong.

Flying a traitor flag over a statehouse is unthinkable, in my opinion. It should have come down over a hundred years ago, but better late than never.

On the other hand, though - exhuming a corpse? That's crazy talk. The man is dead. Good, bad, or indifferent, let him lie.

generally speaking, I wouldn't remove monuments, statues, or other pieces of historical interest; but flying a flag is a symbol that in my opinion a statue is not.

Relapse wrote:
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/

Thats Stone Mountain.
1. Its huge. I mean its bigger than Mount Rushmore large.
2. Its a defacto monument to the Confederacy. Messing with that might start a response that is...not expected. We don't need da crazies going full slow over a statue. With Stone Mountain, they just might. Wait a century.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

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

Bring it yankee and we'll burn you down.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Relapse wrote:
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/

I'm saddened. I thought this thread was about that epic Chaos Legion: The Purge.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 cincydooley wrote:

 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.

Protip when you have a giant mountain dog and a dumbass wiener dog, and the mountain dog only tolerates the wiener dog being alive, watch that the mountain dog doesn't try to pee on the wiener dog's head when they are both by a tree.

 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.

I remember being 15 and bored when out of school.

Pro Tip: I've never seen anyone that used Pro Tip on a forum that I'd share a beer with.

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
Do we allow murderers and rapists their own gravestone?

Yes, we do actually.

Unless for construction purposes or nature, leave the dead alone, even the bad ones. For Forrest, leave the body. Turn the park into a public dump. Justice!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 kronk wrote:

 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.

I remember being 15 and bored when out of school.

Pro Tip: I've never seen anyone that used Pro Tip on a forum that I'd share a beer with.

Pro tip: indeed. Skip the beer and go straight to the bourbon!

 Ustrello wrote:
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.

Bull gak. He was awful, but just one of many, if you actually paid attention in class, young man. Both sides did some fethed up gak during that dark time in our country's history.

General Sherman's "Scorched Earth" march through Georgia

Camp Sumter / Andersonville Prison: Camp Sumter was only in operation for fourteen months, however, during that time 45,000 Union soldiers were imprisoned there, and nearly 13,000 died from disease, poor sanitation, malnutrition, overcrowding, or exposure.

Champ Ferguson at Saltville: He is notorious for acting with marked cruelty and targeting anyone, even women and children, whom he felt crossed him or supported the North. He is said to have cut the heads off 80-year-old men and rolled them down hills into towns. He was arrested within 3 months of returning home to Nashville after hearing news of Lincoln’s assassination, and was tried and hanged on 20 October 1865 for 53 counts of murder.

Sacking of Osceola, Missouri: When the Union soldiers were routed, they fled into the surrounding woods and cornfields, and Lane led his men into the town where they burned 797 of 800 buildings to the ground. They took care to kill none of the civilian population, but forced them from their homes and then searched every room of every building and stripped all belongings deemed of value, before torching everything, even the church. Lane stole a piano for himself. He then ordered 9 men of military age, one of them 16 years old and sobbing over his dead horse, to be tried on suspicion of aiding the Confederacy, and had them shot dead.

Battle of Fort Pillow: Fort Pillow was a Union stronghold on the Tennessee banks of the Mississippi River, near Henning, and on 12 April 1864, it was besieged by up to 2,500 cavalrymen under General Nathan Bedford Forrest, who would later become the first Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan. Forrest easily took control of the high ground around the fort and demanded it be surrendered. The commander refused and Forrest’s men assaulted and overwhelmed the defenders. Many of them were shot down as they fled into the river. Both sides of the war reported that after the fort’s surviving garrison, most of it comprised of black soldiers and civilian workers, surrendered and was disarmed, the Confederates swarmed upon them and bayoneted, knifed, and clubbed some 250 men to death in an orgy of sadism. Over two dozen were castrated and lynched. Forrest always maintained that this massacre was a fair fight because the defenders were armed to the very end.

Lawrence Massacre: Captain William Clarke Quantrill led a raid into Lawrence, Kansas on 21 August 1863. Lawrence was a hotbed of anti-slavery sentiment and Quantrill was a fervent pro-slavery Confederate guerrilla, who had effectively enlisted into the Army under General Sterling Price, but deserted to form his own band of soldiers. There was little law in the Kansas Territory, and Quantrill’s Raiders are known for more than one infraction of it. Quantrill was especially out to kill James Lane, but Lane escaped into a cornfield. The Raiders descended from Mount Oread into town at about 5:00 in the morning and burned down every business and municipal building. Homes were spared torching but the families were driven outside and the husbands, fathers, and son all shot dead on their porches, in the streets, even in their beds. The women were raped, some of them and some children shot down or trampled while they fled. At least 185 men and boys as young as 11 were executed merely for being able-bodied.

Camp Douglas: From 1864 on, the inmates were no longer fed adequately, but given only enough to keep them alive and hungry, purely for the guards’ amusement. They were forced to stand at attention in freezing rain and sleet for hours, during which time the guards robbed them of any valuables. The death toll by the war’s end has been put at 4,454, but many went unreported, and the total figure may be as high as 6,000, most from exposure and disease brought on by malnutrition.

 kronk wrote:

 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.

I remember being 15 and bored when out of school.

Pro Tip: I've never seen anyone that used Pro Tip on a forum that I'd share a beer with.

If ever possible, Kronk, the first round is definitely on me!

Come play at Adepticon or GenCon some time!

Flags that flew in a slaveholding nation, 1776-1861

http://www.ushistory.org/betsy/flagfact.html

What point exactly are you trying to make with the "here are the flags of a nation that used to have slavery and repealed it" post when talking about symbols of a nation that had slavery and not only failed to repeal it but split from the USA for the distinct purpose of keeping slavery legal?

 d-usa wrote:
What point exactly are you trying to make with the "here are the flags of a nation that used to have slavery and repealed it" post when talking about symbols of a nation that had slavery and not only failed to repeal it but split from the USA for the distinct purpose of keeping slavery legal?

Thats your view (which I agree with actually). Not necessarily their view.

Considering all the text we have from the states that seceded and their leaders you have to either be ignorant of the truth or blind to it in order to believe otherwise.

You can argue that individuals fighting for the confederacy were not racist slaveholders, and that is a much more complex discussion with many more gray areas and room for interpretations, but to pretend that the reason the states seceded and the confederacy was created was not for the purpose of slavery is simply wrong.

 d-usa wrote:
Considering all the text we have from the states that seceded and their leaders you have to either be ignorant of the truth or blind to it in order to believe otherwise.

You can argue that individuals fighting for the confederacy were not racist slaveholders, and that is a much more complex discussion with many more gray areas and room for interpretations, but to pretend that the reason the states seceded and the confederacy was created was not for the purpose of slavery is simply wrong.

Well you got me on that. I need someone who disagrees to argue otherwise.

Their view is irrational.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Their view is irrational.

Its very rational depending on the letters and other information provided at the time.
It was about state's rights including federal taxation impacting the southern planters vs. northern farmers. Unfortunately a major state right they were worried about was slavery.

 Frazzled wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Their view is irrational.

Its very rational depending on the letters and other information provided at the time.
It was about state's rights including federal taxation impacting the southern planters vs. northern farmers. Unfortunately a major state right they were worried about was slavery.

I mean, in large part because their economy was wholly dependent on it and sharecropping.....

 Frazzled wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
Considering all the text we have from the states that seceded and their leaders you have to either be ignorant of the truth or blind to it in order to believe otherwise.

You can argue that individuals fighting for the confederacy were not racist slaveholders, and that is a much more complex discussion with many more gray areas and room for interpretations, but to pretend that the reason the states seceded and the confederacy was created was not for the purpose of slavery is simply wrong.

Well you got me on that. I need someone who disagrees to argue otherwise.

Sorry, I meant to edit my post and make it clear that I was trying to talk about "you" in a general people sense and not you in particular.

Spending the past few weeks in Germany brought this whole thing in perspective as well. We have memorials to the German soldiers who died in both world wars in many cities, and people don't really argue that all Germans or all soldiers were nazis. But at the same time you also don't really find memorials to the leaders of Germany or national socialism, or memorials with the symbols of national socialism. You also don't really find people arguing that since not all Germans were nazis you should be able to fly the flag of nazi germany because it was about more than just anti-semitism and the holocaust was just one aspect of Germany during that time. Or people arguing that since Russians and Americans had war-crimes too we should be able to fly the nazi flag if people can fly their flags. The nazis gained power on the back of economic problems and bad feelings from sanctions imposed after WW1, and you don't really find people flying the flag as a symbols of a nations right to economic self determination of anything like that.

Not all people living in or fighting for the confederacy were slaveholders and/or racists, and some people on the union were slaveholdes and/or racist. But slavery and racism was the underlying reason the confederacy was formed, and the symbols of the confederacy will always represend the reason the confederacy existed.

Just because Germans in the Wehrmacht fought for their country and their families and didn't have anything to do with national socialism doesn't mean the national symbols of Nazi Germany are not symbols of racism.
Just because people in the confederate army fought for their state, country, and families and didn't have slaves and were not racist doesn't mean that the national and state symbols of the CSA were not racist

Edit: I hate typing on my phone...