Cost of Removing Confederate Statues

[Michael G.]

Whatever side your on, one question I always wondered about.

If people insist on confederate statues being removed for whatever reason,
who is paying for the machinery and man power to remove them??:shrug:

Can you say "the tax payers".

If these groups insist on removeable, let them collect the funds to pay the removal.

[Bogie Shooter]

:popcorn::popcorn:
More political posts to follow…………

[Bucco]

:popcorn::popcorn:
More political posts to follow…………

Allow me to make you a sage....

30 million taxpayers money on January 6

[Neils]

Many different statues and memorials on public property are offensive to me. How do we get them removed? Hopefully without violent riots!!

[ramred04]

Whatever side your on, one question I always wondered about.

If people insist on confederate statues being removed for whatever reason,
who is paying for the machinery and man power to remove them??:shrug:

Can you say "the tax payers".

If these groups insist on removeable, let them collect the funds to pay the removal.
The cost is minimal to the "cost" it took... to put them up ...

[Dana1963]

Whatever side your on, one question I always wondered about.

If people insist on confederate statues being removed for whatever reason,
who is paying for the machinery and man power to remove them??:shrug:

Can you say "the tax payers".

If these groups insist on removeable, let them collect the funds to pay the removal.
And someday the Schwartz Statue will be removed from Spanish Springs.

[DAVES]

Many different statues and memorials on public property are offensive to me. How do we get them removed? Hopefully without violent riots!!

Reality at least my reality. There is almost no one that cannot think of something that they think is offensive. Around here, the color of the car you neighbor owns, the type of car he/she owns, the color their home is painted, golf cart etc etc etc etc History etc etc etc Books?

When will we reach a line. For me, we crossed that line a long time ago.

[DAVES]

Whatever side your on, one question I always wondered about.

If people insist on confederate statues being removed for whatever reason,
who is paying for the machinery and man power to remove them??:shrug:

Can you say "the tax payers".

If these groups insist on removeable, let them collect the funds to pay the removal.

Where we are today. National debt is now 30 Trillion dollars. I seem to be one of the only who realize I do not comprehend one trillion let alone 30 of them. We chat about billions. Hey a million here a million there get 100 million together before another 100 million and oops we have one trillion. No need to ask if an expense is worth while we are not even actually printing it. Most of the debt is just computer notes. No one is even asking you owe us half a trillion we owe you a trillion so REALITY we owe you not a trillion but half a trillion.

[Two Bills]

Never mind the cost of moving the statues, consider the pooping places the poor pigeons will loose!

[jdulej]

I never understood why we put up statues to honor traitors. Maybe next we'll erect one for the crazy QAnon nut job with the horns

[I'm Popeye!]

Allow me to make you a sage....

30 million taxpayers money on January 6

When did the entrance fee go up for a "peaceful" visit to the Nation's Capital.
Note: Using CNN meaning of: "peaceful".

[I'm Popeye!]

I never understood why we put up statues to honer traitors. Maybe next we'll erect one for the crazy QAnon nut job with the horns

Can you please explain with names the honoring statues you're referring too?

[jdulej]

Can you please explain with names the honoring statues you're referring too?

Confederate generals and Confederate politicians were all traitors to the United States.

[Topspinmo]

Allow me to make you a sage....

30 million taxpayers money on January 6

Why does this guy/gal constantly get away with brainwashing posting?

[Bilyclub]

Confederate generals and Confederate politicians were all traitors to the United States.

But they were pardoned, just like FALN and SDS terrorists.
President Andrew Johnson took no chances. On Christmas Day 1868, he pardoned former Confederates from the crime of treason, thwarting vengeful Northerners, Lost Cause Southerners and headline writers all over the country.

[coralway]

Can you please explain with names the honoring statues you're referring too?






Really? You can't figure that out for yourself?

[saratogaman]

I never understood why we put up statues to honor traitors. Maybe next we'll erect one for the crazy QAnon nut job with the hornsAnd don't forget Benedict Arnold, Alger Hiss, & the Rosenbergs -- they're all part of our history.

[bimmertl]

But they were pardoned, just like FALN and SDS terrorists.
President Andrew Johnson took no chances. On Christmas Day 1868, he pardoned former Confederates from the crime of treason, thwarting vengeful Northerners, Lost Cause Southerners and headline writers all over the country.

Once pardoned, most of them went back to their part time hobby, being active members of the KKK.

[Dana1963]

The cost is minimal to the "cost" it took... to put them up ...
The Confederate memorial was erected in 1890, the first of six monuments that became symbols of white power along the main boulevard in Richmond.
When Dallas Tx removed Lees statue it was cautioned off winning bid was 1.45 million dollars.

[jdulej]

But they were pardoned, just like FALN and SDS terrorists.
President Andrew Johnson took no chances. On Christmas Day 1868, he pardoned former Confederates from the crime of treason, thwarting vengeful Northerners, Lost Cause Southerners and headline writers all over the country.

IMO, that was the right thing to do. But, also just MO, it does not change the fact that they were traitors (okay, pardoned traitors), and don't deserve to be honored with statues.

[DAVES]

I never understood why we put up statues to honor traitors. Maybe next we'll erect one for the crazy QAnon nut job with the horns

First of all my great, great, great grandfather was a Northern General. Traitors? You might read about Robert E Lee a great man of HONOR. But, for his leadership the US would have faced years of guerilla warfare. We are INDOCTRINATED that the civil war was fought to end slavery. That the emancipation proclamation freed the slaves and we buy this INDOCTRINATION fed to us by our teacher's union. For those who can still think.
Reality is when Lincoln issue the emancipation proclamation Jefferson Davis not Lincoln was in charge of the south, In his own writings Lincoln's goal was not to free the slaves but to preserve the union. Lincolns hope was to start a slave revolt in the south.
It did not happen. Had it happened. Yes, it would have caused trouble for the south.
In the south several states 1/3 of the population was slaves-I think Mississippi was an example. It would also have resulted in the slaughter of many slaves.
Why the civil war? States rights. Clearly the issue has not been settled, even today.
Only a small percentage of people fighting for the South owned slaves and the north there were few slaves. The reason, was not morals. It was cheaper to higher an immigrant work them to death and dump em.
Hitler had his book burning. We now destroy our statues and rewrite history-reality.

[Bucco]

Why does this guy/gal constantly get away with brainwashing posting?

A poster expressed concern over the cost of removing statues.

Appropriate to put whatever that cost is in context with other taxpayer costs.

Capitol Riot Costs Will Exceed $30 Million, Official Tells Congress - The New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/24/us/politics/capitol-riot-damage.html)

Architect Of The Capitol Outlines $30 Million In Damages From Pro-Trump Riot : Capitol Insurrection Updates : NPR (https://www.npr.org/sections/insurrection-at-the-capitol/2021/02/24/970977612/architect-of-the-capitol-outlines-30-million-in-damages-from-pro-trump-riot)

Sorry you are offended. Not “whitewashing” as you say at all.

[DAVES]

But they were pardoned, just like FALN and SDS terrorists.
President Andrew Johnson took no chances. On Christmas Day 1868, he pardoned former Confederates from the crime of treason, thwarting vengeful Northerners, Lost Cause Southerners and headline writers all over the country.

I find our current divisiveness similar to what life after the civil war must have been like.
Roughly 10% of our population, of military age, fought in the war. Vets were a common sight missing arms, legs eyes etc. Lincoln wanted to welcome the south back into the union. Lincoln was murdered and Johnson became president. Johnson wanted vengeance. Part of how we got to where we are today.

Pardons and history. Germany lost WWI the French who suffered the greatest number of casualties in WWI wanted and got vengeance. The result was WWII. At the end of WWII they hung a few of the leaders a symbolic gesture. Had they punished all that participated who knows where we would be today. Japan. McArthur abandoned his troops in the Philippines. Leaving my father to experience the Battan death march. He obviously survived. He never spoke about it. McArthur was put in charge of Japan after WWII. He treated them far better than the Japanese treated prisoners, Chinese, Philippines. Some NEED to read about Nan King and Japanese germ warfare, or the fact that they had a peace delegation talking peace when the aircraft carriers left Japan for the attack on Pearl harbor.

Just as today. Reality is far more complex than what most accept as truth.

[TSO/ISPF]

First of all my great, great, great grandfather was a Northern General. Traitors? You might read about Robert E Lee a great man of HONOR. But, for his leadership the US would have faced years of guerilla warfare. We are INDOCTRINATED that the civil war was fought to end slavery. That the emancipation proclamation freed the slaves and we buy this INDOCTRINATION fed to us by our teacher's union. For those who can still think.
Reality is when Lincoln issue the emancipation proclamation Jefferson Davis not Lincoln was in charge of the south, In his own writings Lincoln's goal was not to free the slaves but to preserve the union. Lincolns hope was to start a slave revolt in the south.
It did not happen. Had it happened. Yes, it would have caused trouble for the south.
In the south several states 1/3 of the population was slaves-I think Mississippi was an example. It would also have resulted in the slaughter of many slaves.
Why the civil war? States rights. Clearly the issue has not been settled, even today.
Only a small percentage of people fighting for the South owned slaves and the north there were few slaves. The reason, was not morals. It was cheaper to higher an immigrant work them to death and dump em.
Hitler had his book burning. We now destroy our statues and rewrite history-reality.
In the south 1/3 of the population was slaves and only a small percentage of people in the south owned slaves? Sounds a bit like modern times. 1 percent own most of the wealth. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

[I'm Popeye!]

A poster expressed concern over the cost of removing statues.

Appropriate to put whatever that cost is in context with other taxpayer costs.

Capitol Riot Costs Will Exceed $30 Million, Official Tells Congress - The New York Times[/url]
Sorry you are offended. Not “whitewashing” as you say at all.

We ALL know the United States Government will pay $350.95 for a $10.00 hammer...
A few broken windows, $30 Million! :1rotfl:

[ramred04]

The Confederate memorial was erected in 1890, the first of six monuments that became symbols of white power along the main boulevard in Richmond.
When Dallas Tx removed Lees statue it was cautioned off winning bid was 1.45 million dollars.

The "Cost" I was referring to was,.. not in "Dollars"...

[jimbomaybe]

Confederate generals and Confederate politicians were all traitors to the United States. Perhaps your knowledge of history is better than mine, but reading the articles of confederation that preceded the constitution, the importance of local, states rights, it seems inconceivable that the ,then relativity independent states would have joined into a system they could not walk away from. My understanding is Robert E Lee was offered the command of union forces, refused and resigned his commission because his state wanted to leave the union. As a military commander Gen Lee did remarkedly well with what he had to work with. The confederate states lost due to economic/ logistical realities. After the war this loosing general was offered many appointments by foreign governments due to his demonstrated abilities.

[drducat]

Confederate generals and Confederate politicians were all traitors to the United States.

If anyone wants history to repeat itself, removing all reminders (such as statues) is one good way.

[Michael G.]

My case in Point:

‘Reprehensible’: Lawmaker Calls For Statue Of Abraham Lincoln To Be Taken Down (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/reprehensible-lawmaker-calls-for-statue-of-abraham-lincoln-to-be-taken-down/ar-AAOiB1f?ocid=msedgntp)

[Bay Kid]

It is amazing how a 2 time loser, drug addict Floyd started the destruction of American history. There is so much more to this than a statue. Monument Ave. used to be beautiful now looks like a war zone. To be replaced with a Floyd statue, or maybe a pacifier?
No big deal.

[jdulej]

If anyone wants history to repeat itself, removing all reminders (such as statues) is one good way.

Okay, I am fine with a statue of the confederate generals in chains or jail cells. That might be a better reminder to potential traitors

[drducat]

Okay, I am fine with a statue of the confederate generals in chains or jail cells. That might be a better reminder to potential traitors

It did not begin with confederate generals and it will not end that way either.

[BlackHarley]

First of all my great, great, great grandfather was a Northern General. Traitors? You might read about Robert E Lee a great man of HONOR. But, for his leadership the US would have faced years of guerilla warfare. We are INDOCTRINATED that the civil war was fought to end slavery. That the emancipation proclamation freed the slaves and we buy this INDOCTRINATION fed to us by our teacher's union. For those who can still think.
Reality is when Lincoln issue the emancipation proclamation Jefferson Davis not Lincoln was in charge of the south, In his own writings Lincoln's goal was not to free the slaves but to preserve the union. Lincolns hope was to start a slave revolt in the south.
It did not happen. Had it happened. Yes, it would have caused trouble for the south.
In the south several states 1/3 of the population was slaves-I think Mississippi was an example. It would also have resulted in the slaughter of many slaves.
Why the civil war? States rights. Clearly the issue has not been settled, even today.
Only a small percentage of people fighting for the South owned slaves and the north there were few slaves. The reason, was not morals. It was cheaper to higher an immigrant work them to death and dump em.
Hitler had his book burning. We now destroy our statues and rewrite history-reality.
A point well taken and historically CORRECT! Northern morale was at an all-time low. Lincoln, out of desperation, channeled the war efforts toward a different cause.
You hit the nail on the head! :ho:

[NoMo50]

So...if I try to understand the "logic" expressed by not just some on this forum, but others all over the world...we should destroy all edifices that have any connection whatsoever to slavery. If that is the case, should we not tear down all of the ancient ruins in Rome? How about Greece? And don't forget our own railroad system. All built on the backs of slave labor.

As John Lennon said while reminiscing about Strawberry Fields, "living is easy with eyes closed."

[DaleDivine]

So...if I try to understand the "logic" expressed by not just some on this forum, but others all over the world...we should destroy all edifices that have any connection whatsoever to slavery. If that is the case, should we not tear down all of the ancient ruins in Rome? How about Greece? And don't forget our own railroad system. All built on the backs of slave labor.

As John Lennon said while reminiscing about Strawberry Fields, "living is easy with eyes closed."

Not all slaves building railroads were black. Native American Indians(STILL living in confinement) and Chinese were also a big part of the slavery building the railways across America.
:ohdear::ohdear:

[airstreamingypsy]

It is amazing how a 2 time loser, drug addict Floyd started the destruction of American history. There is so much more to this than a statue. Monument Ave. used to be beautiful now looks like a war zone. To be replaced with a Floyd statue, or maybe a pacifier?
No big deal.

A police officer, hired to protect and serve, murdered a black black man, slowly and brutally, and you think the black man started the destruction of American history?

[cj1040]

And what about disgusting Andrew Jackson on our currency? Then there are the slave owning leaders such as Ben Franklin? Maybe just a photo of the white house and capital building and NO People on our currency???




Whatever side your on, one question I always wondered about.

If people insist on confederate statues being removed for whatever reason,
who is paying for the machinery and man power to remove them??:shrug:

Can you say "the tax payers".

If these groups insist on removeable, let them collect the funds to pay the removal.

[MandoMan]

Whatever side your on, one question I always wondered about.

If people insist on confederate statues being removed for whatever reason,
who is paying for the machinery and man power to remove them??:shrug:

Can you say "the tax payers".

If these groups insist on removeable, let them collect the funds to pay the removal.

We should never have had statues in honor of military officers who took up arms against the United States. We should never have named military bases after them.

On the other hand, there are laws against defacing or destroying a public monument, and those who did it are criminals and should have been charged and punished. There are legal, peaceful ways of petitioning for the removal of these.

And then there are the removal of statues of other people, like Dr. Marion Sims, the Father of Obstetric Surgery, because some people didn’t like his research methods. I expect that any day protestors will tear down the statue of Jefferson in the Jefferson Memorial because he owned slaves. They will tear down statues of Washington, Madison, Monroe, Jackson. They may even try to change the name of Washington, DC because Washington owned slaves. Maybe all the Leesburgs and Washington Counties and Jefferson Counties and all will be forced by violent protest to change their names.

Great people often do things they shouldn’t have done, especially things they wouldn’t do if they were here today. We should concentrate on their accomplishments and forgive them their trespasses, just as we would like people to forgive us ours.

[DAVES]

Confederate generals and Confederate politicians were all traitors to the United States.

HATE is and always has been a powerful yet MINDLESS emotion. Sadly this mentality is what we see consuming our population. We are good they are evil. REALITY is far more REAL and not as simplistic as we are good and they are evil.

[Bsturner]

And someday the Schwartz Statue will be removed from Spanish Springs.

Wow! If you can’t tell the difference you may want to review your history and research the difference between private property and public spaces.

[DeanFL]

.
.
Sure hope the 'usual suspects' here on ToTV feel a whole lot better spewing their typical... 'BUTs' and mention of their favorites, esp Jan 6.

So many here in our country demand to rewrite our history. In so many ways.

Does this statue removal make anyone really feel better? Does it relieve anger or anxiety? IMO it simply divides our country even more.

Perhaps THIS will be the replacement>>>
.

[DAVES]

For far too many they do not realize the first amendment, no state religion, the right to gather, freedom of speech does not say ONLY IF THEY AGREE WITH ME.

[Blackbird45]

The civil war end on April 9, 1865.
The Robert E Lee statue was erected in 1924.
The question should not be how much it cost the tax payers to take it down, it should be how much it cost in todays dollars to put it up.
Let not forget this war was a stain on our country.

[DAVES]

We ALL know the United States Government will pay $350.95 for a $10.00 hammer...
A few broken windows, $30 Million! :1rotfl:

Truth. When Dinkins became mayor of New York i sent him a letter. I would go to work for New York City and they would pay me 10% of every dollar I saved them. Of course I never got a reply. Another NUT. Reality you would have seen my name in the top ten earners in the United States. The second year you would have been reading my obituary all those on the take one or several would have killed me.

[DAVES]

Perhaps your knowledge of history is better than mine, but reading the articles of confederation that preceded the constitution, the importance of local, states rights, it seems inconceivable that the ,then relativity independent states would have joined into a system they could not walk away from. My understanding is Robert E Lee was offered the command of union forces, refused and resigned his commission because his state wanted to leave the union. As a military commander Gen Lee did remarkedly well with what he had to work with. The confederate states lost due to economic/ logistical realities. After the war this loosing general was offered many appointments by foreign governments due to his demonstrated abilities.

As I regularly state HATE is a powerful yet MINDLESS emotion. There is no need for knowledge to HATE. It actually gets in the way. SADLY WHERE WE ARE AND HOW WE GOT HERE.

[DAVES]

It is amazing how a 2 time loser, drug addict Floyd started the destruction of American history. There is so much more to this than a statue. Monument Ave. used to be beautiful now looks like a war zone. To be replaced with a Floyd statue, or maybe a pacifier?
No big deal.

Floyd did not start it. He was just a seized upon event to reinforce the MOB HATE. Which is now running our nation. We THE PEOPLE, are allowing this.

Like most, I find it easier to complain than to do anything. What was, is GONE. Violence so far has been the left. If, it starts if will be led by the white supremacists. I a centrist,
almost an endangered species in the US today do not support either side of where we are today.

[DAVES]

Sorry ,no one cares you are offended. Whatever it is that offends you was put there by more people that admired it.

I find people interesting. "Sorry no one cares you are offended." Sadly that illustrates where we are and how we got here. It reads as my mind is closed. I am right and you are wrong. These and most things are complex issues. People typically communicate in one liners.

Sadly where we are and how we got here. ALL of us need to HONESTLY look around yourselves.

Condi Rice regularly stated at her lectures, If all your friends agree with you, you need some new friends. Reality, I've had several people, one almost a quote say, all my friends agree with me so I am unfriending you.

[Joe C.]

I'm a born and bred Yankee.....New Englander all my life, and yet I understand the events that led to the civil war. And with this understanding, I harbor no ill feelings towards the Confederate generals and others who have had statues erected in their honor. They were still Americans even during the war. Atrocities were committed by both sides, and that's the nature of war. Tearing down statues is reprehensible.

[DAVES]

Not all slaves building railroads were black. Native American Indians(STILL living in confinement) and Chinese were also a big part of the slavery building the railways across America.
:ohdear::ohdear:

As I keep posting. Hate is a powerful yet MINDLESS emotion. It is so simple, facts, REALITY do not matter.

Things in REALITY are not perfect and they never were or will be. WE at least I have it far better than my grandparents or my parents did.

[DAVES]

And what about disgusting Andrew Jackson on our currency? Then there are the slave owning leaders such as Ben Franklin? Maybe just a photo of the white house and capital building and NO People on our currency???

As I keep posting, nothing is or ever can be perfect. The white house? I seem to recall there is was some race issues with that as well. I do not expect it to happen but were they to put me on the dollar bill and people started digging surely they could find something.

Teasing a little. The birthing issue. In have a certificate of my birth. It has a foot print on it. Not sure why a foot print and not a finger print-perhaps concern about breaking bones on a new born. My mom passed years ago. The doctor was surely older than my parents.
Assuming he is still alive he would be like 100. They would surely question him and wonder if he recalls my birth. Hum, no need to have my portrait taken for the new politically correct currency.

[DAVES]

A police officer, hired to protect and serve, murdered a black black man, slowly and brutally, and you think the black man started the destruction of American history?

We discuss one issue at a time. REALITY, where we live, like it or not does not happen one issue at a time

[jimbomaybe]

As I regularly state HATE is a powerful yet MINDLESS emotion. There is no need for knowledge to HATE. It actually gets in the way. SADLY WHERE WE ARE AND HOW WE GOT HERE.Allow me to pour gasoline on this bonfire, the historical importance of the civil war was the preservation of the "United States" slavery an antiquated , barbaric intuition would have fallen of its own weight in any event. Had the then United States been split in two it would never had become the economic, political and most importantly the military power it has , that would have changed the course of history and who know where that may have gone

[DAVES]

Allow me to pour gasoline on this bonfire, the historical importance of the civil war was the preservation of the "United States" slavery an antiquated , barbaric intuition would have fallen of its own weight in any event. Had the then United States been split in two it would never had become the economic, political and most importantly the military power it has , that would have changed the course of history and who know where that may have gone

As I've stated we deal with one issue at a time. REALITY where we actually live does not happen that way. I would not expect or demand that anyone read all my posts. But, I did say that Lincoln unlike what is INDOCTRINATED to students in our current school system had as his main goal to preserve the Union. Not to free the slaves.

Slavery? As much as we try to believe, we would have.......... The reality was that half the wealth of the south was in the value of slaves. Would I would WE give up 1/3 of our wealth. Add to that, imagine a violent uprising of 1/3 of your population. A source of wealth. The north had few slaves. Saintly, no. Immigrant labor was cheaper and plentiful. New York famous for great natural harbors, made a lot of money exporting cotton to europe.

Reality, history, is far different and more interesting than what most people know or wish to know. Nothing is as simple as the HATE that seem to be running our country.
The simplistic view we are good and they are evil.

[dougjb]

In New York City, there is a square called Bowling Green in lower Manhattan. After the Revolutionary War, the symbols of the crown of England were broken off the posts on the fence surrounding this area. That is the way, losers to a war are generally treated (e.g. Saddam statues, Lenin statutes, Stalin statues). Would you prefer the barbarism of this type of removal or would you rather have the government remove the losers in a more sterile manner?

[quietpine]

.
OMG - talk about blindness. Of course YOUR Media does not cover the repercussions.

and your $$$$ is WAY off - WASHINGTON — Forty-five billion dollars per year. That’s how much the Pentagon says the Afghan war is costing American taxpayers, and with no end in sight they may have to keep footing that bill for years to come..
.

You’re right, sorry. I can’t do math. $2.1T over 20 years is still a lot. I wonder how many statues US taxpayers paid to put up and take down in Kabul.

[zendog3]

The fathers of the Confederacy claimed to be fighting for the principle of state's rights, one of those rights being the institution of slavery. But many made it abundantly clear they considered black people inferior. Therefore, they stated clearly that the war was to preserve the institution of slavery.

Lincoln was no saint. While his position of the status of black people changed over his life, he felt that blacks should not be slaves, but it would be generations before they evolved to a position of equality with white European immigrants.

Immediately after the Civil War, blacks had relatively equal status with whites. But after the north removed the occupation of the south. Whites moved quickly to reimpose repression of black people. It was in that period that veneration of Confederate generals took place.

Put simply, do we want glorious statues to men whose main claim to fame was that they were willing to die and put others to death to preserve the right of white people to keep black people in chains? Again, think about what slavery is. If you were a black person, how would you feel walking under a heroic statue to a general who fought to keep your family in slavery?

Although overt racism is out of vogue, there are still people who think Lincoln was right. Black people aren't relatively equal to white people. If you are one of that–shame on you. America will never be the great nation we aspire to be until all Americans have equality. And, we should not have monuments to people who fought against that ideal.

[I'm Popeye!]

Really? You can't figure that out for yourself?

Yes Really...
They believed in what they thought was right.
Just like one of your hero's, a modern American Traitor that gave millions on top of millions of dollars to an enemy of this country, the Iranians.
These statues that have been taken down have been stationed in their place for many years in history, now that the WOKE nuts are trying to rewrite history to their lopsided favor. These days, just about everyone is alright with it, just so they don't get categorized as a racist.

[Tom2172]

Allow me to make you a sage....

30 million taxpayers money on January 6

Bull

[jrzeis@tampabay.rr.com]

I know, lets just remove all references to our past including the good along with the bad, that way we will forget the bad and be doomed to repeat it, and be ignorant of the good and not have an example of what worked Lets just blindly remove anything offensive that way no one has anything to complain about (I'm sure everyone has something they don't' like). Why not remove all references to 9/11 because I am sure there are more than a few people that get emotionally upset remembering the past because it was very painful and they find the entire act offensive because they lost loved ones.

[Blackbird45]

For those who are offended and those who upset they are being taken down. I'm a New Yorker and we have our share of statues.
People walk by them everyday and don't even notice them and if they do they don't know who they are.
50 maybe 100 years from now unless it sitting in the middle of Washington, your a historian or your a pigeon using it as a porta potty they will be ignored like everything else.

[DeanFL]

I know, lets just remove all references to our past including the good along with the bad, that way we will forget the bad and be doomed to repeat it, and be ignorant of the good and not have an example of what worked Lets just blindly remove anything offensive that way no one has anything to complain about (I'm sure everyone has something they don't' like). Why not remove all references to 9/11 because I am sure there are more than a few people that get emotionally upset remembering the past because it was very painful and they find the entire act offensive because they lost loved ones.
.
.
IDIOTS have already begun just that>>>

Another landmark in the town of Plymouth, Massachusetts, was vandalized, making it the eighth site in less than a week to be tampered with, officials said.

This time it was the 9/11 memorial, which was found "desecrated by vandals" on Sunday, according to the town's fire department.
The memorial -- a 6-feet-tall granite pillar with the names of those killed in the attacks engraved on it and statutes of a firefighter and police officer standing beside it -- was erected in 2004.

Photos showed the police officer statue at the memorial was knocked over, with his head separated from his body. The statue of the firefighter at the memorial did not appear to be touched.

"They can knock us down, but we will always get back up even stronger," the fire department tweeted, noting that more than 25 firefighters came out to help restore the memorial.

Less than a week before it was vandalized, seven other iconic sites in Plymouth, including Plymouth Rock, were defaced.
.
.

[tvbound]

I never understood why we put up statues to honor traitors. Maybe next we'll erect one for the crazy QAnon nut job with the horns

The majority of those monuments/statues/Etc. were erected long after 'The War of Traitors on the United States' to intimidate blacks and to push Jim Crow laws. If someone wants to worship a bunch of traitorous losers on private, NOT public, property, I have no problem with that and say - go for it. Not to mention that removing them has absolutely no affect on actual/true history, so that argument is dead from the beginning.

[G.R.I.T.S.]

Allow me to make you a sage....

30 million taxpayers money on January 6

$1B + for “protests” last summer. 🙄

[tvbound]

$1B + for “protests” last summer. 🙄

And TRILLIONS of lost family wealth/passed down inheritances to blacks, from the beginning of slavery - because of racism. Racism being the primary reason, that those protests happened.

Racism Has Cost Black Americans $70 Trillion Since Slavery (https://www.businessinsider.com/personal-finance/what-racism-has-cost-black-americans-black-tax-2020-9)

[DAVES]

The fathers of the Confederacy claimed to be fighting for the principle of state's rights, one of those rights being the institution of slavery. But many made it abundantly clear they considered black people inferior. Therefore, they stated clearly that the war was to preserve the institution of slavery.

Lincoln was no saint. While his position of the status of black people changed over his life, he felt that blacks should not be slaves, but it would be generations before they evolved to a position of equality with white European immigrants.

Immediately after the Civil War, blacks had relatively equal status with whites. But after the north removed the occupation of the south. Whites moved quickly to reimpose repression of black people. It was in that period that veneration of Confederate generals took place.

Put simply, do we want glorious statues to men whose main claim to fame was that they were willing to die and put others to death to preserve the right of white people to keep black people in chains? Again, think about what slavery is. If you were a black person, how would you feel walking under a heroic statue to a general who fought to keep your family in slavery?

Although overt racism is out of vogue, there are still people who think Lincoln was right. Black people aren't relatively equal to white people. If you are one of that–shame on you. America will never be the great nation we aspire to be until all Americans have equality. And, we should not have monuments to people who fought against that ideal.

REALITY-things never are or will be perfect.
Black people? REALITY you meet someone anyone it is male, female, tall short, fat, skinny, black, white, young, old, rich, poor, fit, or not. All are judgements. FAIR, what is fair? Could we get all to agree what is fair? Obviously not.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

The majority of those monuments/statues/Etc. were erected long after 'The War of Traitors on the United States' to intimidate blacks and to push Jim Crow laws. If someone wants to worship a bunch of traitorous losers on private, NOT public, property, I have no problem with that and say - go for it. Not to mention that removing them has absolutely no affect on actual/true history, so that argument is dead from the beginning.

I sincerely feel that the monuments erected within the first decades following the Civil War should be moved to museums of history, and possibly even in art gallery expeditions. At this point, the statues themselves have histories of their own, no matter what they might represent.

I don't feel they belong in public parks. I don't think we need to (or should) forget that these statues were built, and why they were built. If they are eliminated from existence, it'd be easier to forget.

They deserve a 3-D version of a "wall of shame." To say "this is the image of the man who was a really nice guy even though he committed treason against his country to fight against it in the Civil War and this isn't actually the horse he rode in on, because his actual horse was too small so the artist made this horse bigger for perspective."

With plaques explaining what each statue is about.

[jimjamuser]

Where we are today. National debt is now 30 Trillion dollars. I seem to be one of the only who realize I do not comprehend one trillion let alone 30 of them. We chat about billions. Hey a million here a million there get 100 million together before another 100 million and oops we have one trillion. No need to ask if an expense is worth while we are not even actually printing it. Most of the debt is just computer notes. No one is even asking you owe us half a trillion we owe you a trillion so REALITY we owe you not a trillion but half a trillion.
Let's talk about getting revenue for the Federal Government by taxing the revenue brackets and wealth of those that have gained the most by being in the US. That sounds fair to me! After that, I am sure that we will have plenty to go toward that NASTY Nation Debt that worries people so much and STILL have some leftover to give bonuses to the Medical staff in Hospitals that gave so much recently!

[jimjamuser]

First of all my great, great, great grandfather was a Northern General. Traitors? You might read about Robert E Lee a great man of HONOR. But, for his leadership the US would have faced years of guerilla warfare. We are INDOCTRINATED that the civil war was fought to end slavery. That the emancipation proclamation freed the slaves and we buy this INDOCTRINATION fed to us by our teacher's union. For those who can still think.
Reality is when Lincoln issue the emancipation proclamation Jefferson Davis not Lincoln was in charge of the south, In his own writings Lincoln's goal was not to free the slaves but to preserve the union. Lincolns hope was to start a slave revolt in the south.
It did not happen. Had it happened. Yes, it would have caused trouble for the south.
In the south several states 1/3 of the population was slaves-I think Mississippi was an example. It would also have resulted in the slaughter of many slaves.
Why the civil war? States rights. Clearly the issue has not been settled, even today.
Only a small percentage of people fighting for the South owned slaves and the north there were few slaves. The reason, was not morals. It was cheaper to higher an immigrant work them to death and dump em.
Hitler had his book burning. We now destroy our statues and rewrite history-reality.
True ....the issue of state's rights is NOT settled today. And IMO that is NOT a good thing.

[jimjamuser]

In the south 1/3 of the population was slaves and only a small percentage of people in the south owned slaves? Sounds a bit like modern times. 1 percent own most of the wealth. The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Absolutely true!

[drducat]

The majority of those monuments/statues/Etc. were erected long after 'The War of Traitors on the United States' to intimidate blacks and to push Jim Crow laws. If someone wants to worship a bunch of traitorous losers on private, NOT public, property, I have no problem with that and say - go for it. Not to mention that removing them has absolutely no affect on actual/true history, so that argument is dead from the beginning.

Except the ideologies in the schools no longer teach true history....so the argument is not dead...erasing history is a recipe for disaster.:popcorn:

[drducat]

Originally Posted by heims01 View Post
In the south 1/3 of the population was slaves and only a small percentage of people in the south owned slaves? Sounds a bit like modern times. 1 percent own most of the wealth. The more things change, the more they stay the same.



Absolutely true!


Now we called them employees.:doh:

[jdulej]

In the south 1/3 of the population was slaves and only a small percentage of people in the south owned slaves? Sounds a bit like modern times. 1 percent own most of the wealth. The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Don't think so. I'll take poor to being a slave every day of the week.

[tvbound]

Although not everyone owned slaves, the vast majority of confederate state citizens knew how important the free labor and the owning of other human beings - was to the economy. THAT is the reason they fought to keep it.

How Slavery Became the Economic Engine of the South - HISTORY (/news/slavery-profitable-southern-economy)

[tvbound]

Don't think so. I'll take poor to being a slave every day of the week.

"I'll take poor to being a slave every day of the week."

As if almost every single person trying to defend the traitors, don't really feel the exact same way.

[I'm Popeye!]

Don't think so. I'll take poor to being a slave every day of the week.
I guess you have no clue what poor really is...
Besides, Slaves were poor before coming into this country. :ho:

[jdulej]

I guess you have no clue what poor really is...
Besides, Slaves were poor before coming into this country. :ho:

Wow. So you take chains and the whip for 3 squares a day? Be my guest.

[Bogie Shooter]

I guess you have no clue what poor really is...
Besides, Slaves were poor before coming into this country. :ho:

“Coming”
Actually forced to come.

[charlieo1126@gmail.com]

Although not everyone owned slaves, the vast majority of confederate state citizens knew how important the free labor and the owning of other human beings - was to the economy. THAT is the reason they fought to keep it.

How Slavery Became the Economic Engine of the South - HISTORY (/news/slavery-profitable-southern-economy) but it will fall on deaf ears here , the Noble Cause theory is the only one here many will embrace , I read some of the comments and can’t help thinking that some are whistling Dixie while they write

[realmoxies]

Many different statues and memorials on public property are offensive to me. How do we get them removed? Hopefully without violent riots!!
Walk on, just keep walking. Why should what you find offensive that others don't require an action on their part.
Just Move On!

[EdFNJ]

Allow me to make you a sage....

30 million taxpayers money on January 6 Yup, the same taxpayers who paid 5X the "normal" rate to stay in a red (orange?) politician hotel owners hotels to protect him. The same taxpayers who paid 5x the going rate for office space in those hotels for a big red party. Two wrongs don't make a right but if you're gonna disparage what you consider wastefulness you may as well show both sides of the fence. At least one is based on history whether you agree with it or not while the other is simply profiteering and self-enrichment.

[Bucco]

Yup, the same taxpayers who paid 5X the "normal" rate to stay in a red (orange?) politician hotel owners hotels to protect him. The same taxpayers who paid 5x the going rate for office space in those hotels for a big red party. Two wrongs don't make a right but if you're gonna disparage what you consider wastefulness you may as well show both sides of the fence. At least one is based on history whether you agree with it or not while the other is simply profiteering and self-enrichment.

However, that 30 million was needed due to a normal, but busy day with “tourists” all over the capitol.

[doctorknow]

[QUOTE=Neils;2001560]Many different statues and memorials on public property are offensive to me. How do we get them removed? Hopefully without violent riots!![/QUOT

Why are so many things now "offensive" to so many people? I can remember a day when you can agree to disagree and not be offended. This political correctness is out of hand. There should not be anything"correct" about politics just different. You may agree or disagree but to be offended ...really???

[I'm Popeye!]

Why is it that these Statues and Confederate flags did not insult as many until lately when the PINK headed He/She/It/Thing came to be?

[RICH1]

And someday the Schwartz Statue will be removed from Spanish Springs.
and Charge all of us an assessment because the Apartment Dwellers were offended

[Bay Kid]

Wow. So you take chains and the whip for 3 squares a day? Be my guest.

Too much tv.

[CoachKandSportsguy]

I find our current divisiveness similar to what life after the civil war must have been like.
Roughly 10% of our population, of military age, fought in the war. Vets were a common sight missing arms, legs eyes etc. Lincoln wanted to welcome the south back into the union. Lincoln was murdered and Johnson became president. Johnson wanted vengeance. Part of how we got to where we are today.


Just as today. Reality is far more complex than what most accept as truth.

:bigbow:

I come from the same family as Abraham Lincoln, which landed in Hingham MA in the 1630s, but not a direct relative, as there are none remaining, and I trace my origins back to Lincolnshire, England.

What people forget in their American history class is the UNITED STATES part, a collection of states rights, and that the Constitution was written in a very different time and place, with very different attitudes, but with great intentions for being the best government for the people of the times.

Keeping the union of 50 states with states rights is a huge balancing act, and is getting harder to manage the bigger we grow, and the in the age of worldwide social media, has other governments wanting to subvert through psy-ops. . . .

That is the nature of the human existence, especially in european and western cultures. Similar issues in the Euro, which is a collection of european country rights to try to compete with the US and others collectively.

Humans having some herding instincts find that having a common enemy helps survival and organization for a leader. . . in behavioral psychology, its competitive human organizational games versus cooperative human organizational games.

[jimjamuser]

I find people interesting. "Sorry no one cares you are offended." Sadly that illustrates where we are and how we got here. It reads as my mind is closed. I am right and you are wrong. These and most things are complex issues. People typically communicate in one liners.

Sadly where we are and how we got here. ALL of us need to HONESTLY look around yourselves.

Condi Rice regularly stated at her lectures, If all your friends agree with you, you need some new friends. Reality, I've had several people, one almost a quote say, all my friends agree with me so I am unfriending you.
Break up Facebook!

[jimjamuser]

The fathers of the Confederacy claimed to be fighting for the principle of state's rights, one of those rights being the institution of slavery. But many made it abundantly clear they considered black people inferior. Therefore, they stated clearly that the war was to preserve the institution of slavery.

Lincoln was no saint. While his position of the status of black people changed over his life, he felt that blacks should not be slaves, but it would be generations before they evolved to a position of equality with white European immigrants.

Immediately after the Civil War, blacks had relatively equal status with whites. But after the north removed the occupation of the south. Whites moved quickly to reimpose repression of black people. It was in that period that veneration of Confederate generals took place.

Put simply, do we want glorious statues to men whose main claim to fame was that they were willing to die and put others to death to preserve the right of white people to keep black people in chains? Again, think about what slavery is. If you were a black person, how would you feel walking under a heroic statue to a general who fought to keep your family in slavery?

Although overt racism is out of vogue, there are still people who think Lincoln was right. Black people aren't relatively equal to white people. If you are one of that–shame on you. America will never be the great nation we aspire to be until all Americans have equality. And, we should not have monuments to people who fought against that ideal.
President Johnson pushed through Civil Rights Legislation, but it did NOT go far enough. it needed mechanisms to eliminate "ghettoes" and encourage non-white home purchases in White areas. It needed Federal laws against restrictive building codes that were NOT for safety, but rather, to maintain racial separation. Also, adoption laws that REQUIRED adoption of different races - would have been NICE. The US MISSED its WINDOW of opportunity toward FULL equality in the 1960s!

[jimjamuser]

Too much tv.
As in....television or The Villages? tv or tv?

[jimjamuser]

:bigbow:

I come from the same family as Abraham Lincoln, which landed in Hingham MA in the 1630s, but not a direct relative, as there are none remaining, and I trace my origins back to Lincolnshire, England.

What people forget in their American history class is the UNITED STATES part, a collection of states rights, and that the Constitution was written in a very different time and place, with very different attitudes, but with great intentions for being the best government for the people of the times.

Keeping the union of 50 states with states rights is a huge balancing act, and is getting harder to manage the bigger we grow, and the in the age of worldwide social media, has other governments wanting to subvert through psy-ops. . . .

That is the nature of the human existence, especially in european and western cultures. Similar issues in the Euro, which is a collection of european country rights to try to compete with the US and others collectively.

Humans having some herding instincts find that having a common enemy helps survival and organization for a leader. . . in behavioral psychology, its competitive human organizational games versus cooperative human organizational games.
I would change the 2 Senators per state rule - to somewhat MORE proportional to population! Also, the Jim Crow aspects of the initial erecting of the statues, sort of, tells the tale of the reason for so doing!

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

:bigbow:

I come from the same family as Abraham Lincoln, which landed in Hingham MA in the 1630s, but not a direct relative, as there are none remaining, and I trace my origins back to Lincolnshire, England.

What people forget in their American history class is the UNITED STATES part, a collection of states rights, and that the Constitution was written in a very different time and place, with very different attitudes, but with great intentions for being the best government for the people of the times.

Keeping the union of 50 states with states rights is a huge balancing act, and is getting harder to manage the bigger we grow, and the in the age of worldwide social media, has other governments wanting to subvert through psy-ops. . . .

That is the nature of the human existence, especially in european and western cultures. Similar issues in the Euro, which is a collection of european country rights to try to compete with the US and others collectively.

Humans having some herding instincts find that having a common enemy helps survival and organization for a leader. . . in behavioral psychology, its competitive human organizational games versus cooperative human organizational games.

What's the solution then? Do we split up the USA into countries? Do we force Texas to secede (which I personally think would be a swell idea)? Do we split up Florida into its own North and South, with south being more progressive-minded and north being less (since that's pretty much how it is now anyway)?

Does the governor become the emperor of his state-nation? What's the duty tax for imports and exports going to look like now? How will they pay for the gas pipeline that is no longer part of their country, since they're no longer one of the United States? Do we have 50 different countries now? Does each region become a single country? Like - New England and New York are now The United States of New America, and the central states become "The United States of North-Central America" and what not?

How would that even work?

It might be necessary, some day. But right now? Not gonna happen. So we need solutions for now.

And right now, we have a "United" country that is "divided" politically to the point where any mention of any "issue" becomes an exercise in futile teeth-gnashing at best, violence at worst.

[JMintzer]

And what about disgusting Andrew Jackson on our currency? Then there are the slave owning leaders such as Ben Franklin? Maybe just a photo of the white house and capital building and NO People on our currency???

From The History Chanel...

"He spent his later years as an abolitionist.
Franklin owned two slaves during his life, both of whom worked as household servants, but in his old age he came to view slavery as a vile institution that ran counter to the principles of the American Revolution.

He took over as president of a Pennsylvania abolitionist society in 1787, and in 1790 he presented a petition to Congress urging it to grant liberty “to those unhappy men who alone in this land of freedom are degraded into perpetual bondage.”

While the petition was ignored, Franklin kept up the fight until his death a few months later, and even included a provision in his will that required his daughter and son-in-law to free their slave to get their inheritance."

[JMintzer]

The civil war end on April 9, 1865.
The Robert E Lee statue was erected in 1924.
The question should not be how much it cost the tax payers to take it down, it should be how much it cost in todays dollars to put it up.
Let not forget this war was a stain on our country.

Most of the statues were paid for via private donations...

[JMintzer]

As I've stated we deal with one issue at a time. REALITY where we actually live does not happen that way. I would not expect or demand that anyone read all my posts. But, I did say that Lincoln unlike what is INDOCTRINATED to students in our current school system had as his main goal to preserve the Union. Not to free the slaves.m to be running our country.
The simplistic view we are good and they are evil.

What was that quote of Lincoln's?

"If I could preserve the Union without freeing a single slave, I would do it"... (I may have paraphrased a bit)...

[JMintzer]

The fathers of the Confederacy claimed to be fighting for the principle of state's rights, one of those rights being the institution of slavery. But many made it abundantly clear they considered black people inferior. Therefore, they stated clearly that the war was to preserve the institution of slavery.

Lincoln was no saint. While his position of the status of black people changed over his life, he felt that blacks should not be slaves, but it would be generations before they evolved to a position of equality with white European immigrants.

Immediately after the Civil War, blacks had relatively equal status with whites. But after the north removed the occupation of the south. Whites moved quickly to reimpose repression of black people. It was in that period that veneration of Confederate generals took place.

Put simply, do we want glorious statues to men whose main claim to fame was that they were willing to die and put others to death to preserve the right of white people to keep black people in chains? Again, think about what slavery is. If you were a black person, how would you feel walking under a heroic statue to a general who fought to keep your family in slavery?

Although overt racism is out of vogue, there are still people who think Lincoln was right. Black people aren't relatively equal to white people. If you are one of that–shame on you. America will never be the great nation we aspire to be until all Americans have equality. And, we should not have monuments to people who fought against that ideal.

Ummm...

The 3/5s of a man was a compromise demanded by the NORTH. Not the South...

It was to preserve their population (and therefore voting representation) dominance over the South...

[JMintzer]

President Johnson pushed through Civil Rights Legislation, but it did NOT go far enough. it needed mechanisms to eliminate "ghettoes" and encourage non-white home purchases in White areas. It needed Federal laws against restrictive building codes that were NOT for safety, but rather, to maintain racial separation. Also, adoption laws that REQUIRED adoption of different races - would have been NICE. The US MISSED its WINDOW of opportunity toward FULL equality in the 1960s!

Are you familiar with his notorious comment about what would happen once he passed the bill?

[Ben Franklin]

Whatever side your on, one question I always wondered about.

If people insist on confederate statues being removed for whatever reason,
who is paying for the machinery and man power to remove them??:shrug:

Can you say "the tax payers".



If these groups insist on removeable, let them collect the funds to pay the removal.

Why? If people didn't want the statues in the first place, why did they have to pay a sculpture, and then the machinery to place it there, AND maintain it every year? Why didn't those who wanted it in the first place pay for everything, and not charge it off to the taxpayers?

[Bay Kid]

As in....television or The Villages? tv or tv?

Sorry television. Never too much TVs!

[ThirdOfFive]

Whatever side your on, one question I always wondered about.

If people insist on confederate statues being removed for whatever reason,
who is paying for the machinery and man power to remove them??:shrug:

Can you say "the tax payers".

If these groups insist on removeable, let them collect the funds to pay the removal.
It's a bit mystifying that it's taken the virtue-signalers among us about 170 years to even realize the statues were there.

[ThirdOfFive]

Confederate generals and Confederate politicians were all traitors to the United States.
Many Confederate soldiers later served in the ranks of the U.S. army after the Civil War was over. This included four former Confederate generals; Gen. Joseph Wheeler, Gen. Fitzhugh Lee (nephew of Confederate General Robert E. Lee), Gen. Matthew C. Butler, and Gen. Thomas L. Rosser.

Apparently the people of the time were not nearly so ready to see the soldiers who served the Confederacy as traitors, as many are today.

[tvbound]

It's a bit mystifying that it's taken the virtue-signalers among us about 170 years to even realize the statues were there.


"about 170 years to even realize the statues were there."

That's simply not true. Decent people have been complaining about them being on public property, pretty much since they were put up to intimidate black Americans and push back against eliminating Jim Crow and segregation laws. As for being "170 years," there's a timeline in a previous post, w/link, that showed when the most active periods of the vast majority of these statues/monuments were erected (20th Century) - but certainly wasn't 10 years prior to the Civil War even starting.

[Bay Kid]

"about 170 years to even realize the statues were there."

That's simply not true. Decent people have been complaining about them being on public property, pretty much since they were put up to intimidate black Americans and push back against eliminating Jim Crow and segregation laws. As for being "170 years," there's a timeline in a previous post, w/link, that showed when the most active periods of the vast majority of these statues/monuments were erected (20th Century) - but certainly wasn't 10 years prior to the Civil War even starting.

Not on Monument Ave. Not until the Floyd ordeal.

[Laker14]

The idea that the United States was EVER a politically and ethically united country is a total myth. From the time the first explorers and settlers came to this continent, they came from different countries, and for different reasons, and they brought with them most of their ethical, moral and political beliefs. They often conflicted with each other over borders, politics and religion. In addition to trying to shove those beliefs on each other, they shoved them down the throats of the aboriginal population.
Slavery is just one of the many issues upon which various powerful factions disagreed. From the time of the original founding of the USA, all the way to the Emancipation Proclamation, it was a point of contention between Northern and Southern states, but more for the reason of political and financial power, than for any feeling of empathy for the plight of the slaves themselves.
When the Civil War (or "War of Northern Aggression" as the Confederate States referred to the conflict) was over, and slaves were "freed", they were not given any status of citizenship. They were not conferred any status of equality with white people. They were denied education, denied land except in a very few instances, and they were denied the right to vote. So while they may have been ceremonially "free", they still needed to eat, and to have a roof over their heads, and the only way to do that was essentially to live the same life they had always lived, and their progenitors had lived, and that was working the land they didn't own, for whatever the owners would give back to them.
I come from Sicilian immigrants who were, when they arrived, discriminated against. They worked their butts off, but nobody would sell them the land that they needed to build their own lives on. For a while. Eventually someone sold them land, and in 15 years they owned their own home, free and clear. The next generation went to war, and to college, although many of them were the first Italian-Americans to be admitted and eventually graduate from their respective schools. They were also discriminated against, but not to the extent that the previous generation had been. The next generation, my father's, also went to war and to college. My father said he never experienced any racism or bigotry attached to his Italian heritage. I was born in 1953, grew up in Ohio, and I never experienced any either.
When I walk down the street nobody looks at me and says "there is a descendant of Sicillian immigrants". Nobody knows, nobody cares, and THAT, folks, is because I'm "white".
It is completely different for an African-American. He or she wears their heritage on their skin. If you are a white person in this country you have NO FREEKING IDEA whatsoever what it is like to be a black person in this country. None, whatsoever.

If you think it's OK to honor rich, white slave owners who fought in an effort to preserve the institution of human slavery, and you can't see why the descendants of those slaves find it offensive and inappropriate and even threatening to do so on public land, then you do not understand, or you do not care about the generations of human suffering and oppression that those monuments honor.

[tvbound]

The idea that the United States was EVER a politically and ethically united country is a total myth. From the time the first explorers and settlers came to this continent, they came from different countries, and for different reasons, and they brought with them most of their ethical, moral and political beliefs. They often conflicted with each other over borders, politics and religion. In addition to trying to shove those beliefs on each other, they shoved them down the throats of the aboriginal population.
Slavery is just one of the many issues upon which various powerful factions disagreed. From the time of the original founding of the USA, all the way to the Emancipation Proclamation, it was a point of contention between Northern and Southern states, but more for the reason of political and financial power, than for any feeling of empathy for the plight of the slaves themselves.
When the Civil War (or "War of Northern Aggression" as the Confederate States referred to the conflict) was over, and slaves were "freed", they were not given any status of citizenship. They were not conferred any status of equality with white people. They were denied education, denied land except in a very few instances, and they were denied the right to vote. So while they may have been ceremonially "free", they still needed to eat, and to have a roof over their heads, and the only way to do that was essentially to live the same life they had always lived, and their progenitors had lived, and that was working the land they didn't own, for whatever the owners would give back to them.
I come from Sicilian immigrants who were, when they arrived, discriminated against. They worked their butts off, but nobody would sell them the land that they needed to build their own lives on. For a while. Eventually someone sold them land, and in 15 years they owned their own home, free and clear. The next generation went to war, and to college, although many of them were the first Italian-Americans to be admitted and eventually graduate from their respective schools. They were also discriminated against, but not to the extent that the previous generation had been. The next generation, my father's, also went to war and to college. My father said he never experienced any racism or bigotry attached to his Italian heritage. I was born in 1953, grew up in Ohio, and I never experienced any either.
When I walk down the street nobody looks at me and says "there is a descendant of Sicillian immigrants". Nobody knows, nobody cares, and THAT, folks, is because I'm "white".
It is completely different for an African-American. He or she wears their heritage on their skin. If you are a white person in this country you have NO FREEKING IDEA whatsoever what it is like to be a black person in this country. None, whatsoever.

If you think it's OK to honor rich, white slave owners who fought in an effort to preserve the institution of human slavery, and you can't see why the descendants of those slaves find it offensive and inappropriate and even threatening to do so on public land, then you do not understand, or you do not care about the generations of human suffering and oppression that those monuments honor.


"If you are a white person in this country you have NO FREEKING IDEA whatsoever what it is like to be a black person in this country. None, whatsoever."

Excellent post! If only more people understood the truth/facts - and felt like yourself. Not to mention, that almost none of those who downplay being born black, ever even think that they wished they had been born with black skin in this country.

[Byte1]

The fathers of the Confederacy claimed to be fighting for the principle of state's rights, one of those rights being the institution of slavery. But many made it abundantly clear they considered black people inferior. Therefore, they stated clearly that the war was to preserve the institution of slavery.

Lincoln was no saint. While his position of the status of black people changed over his life, he felt that blacks should not be slaves, but it would be generations before they evolved to a position of equality with white European immigrants.

Immediately after the Civil War, blacks had relatively equal status with whites. But after the north removed the occupation of the south. Whites moved quickly to reimpose repression of black people. It was in that period that veneration of Confederate generals took place.

Put simply, do we want glorious statues to men whose main claim to fame was that they were willing to die and put others to death to preserve the right of white people to keep black people in chains? Again, think about what slavery is. If you were a black person, how would you feel walking under a heroic statue to a general who fought to keep your family in slavery?

Although overt racism is out of vogue, there are still people who think Lincoln was right. Black people aren't relatively equal to white people. If you are one of that–shame on you. America will never be the great nation we aspire to be until all Americans have equality. And, we should not have monuments to people who fought against that ideal.

Lincoln was a racist too. Wasn't he involved in the creation of Liberia, consisting of an experiment in exporting slaves/former slaves to Africa? Guess we had better tear down monuments honoring him. Washington had slaves so tear down the Washington Monument. Better yet, every man is flawed so let's remove any reminders to anything that is not showing America favorably.

[coralway]

Whatever side your on, one question I always wondered about.

If people insist on confederate statues being removed for whatever reason,
who is paying for the machinery and man power to remove them??:shrug:

Can you say "the tax payers".

If these groups insist on removeable, let them collect the funds to pay the removal.




Who pays? The same folks who paid a couple hundred million dollars so a government official could play golf every weekend.

[Laker14]

Lincoln was a racist too. Wasn't he involved in the creation of Liberia, consisting of an experiment in exporting slaves/former slaves to Africa? Guess we had better tear down monuments honoring him. Washington had slaves so tear down the Washington Monument. Better yet, every man is flawed so let's remove any reminders to anything that is not showing America favorably.

But neither Lincoln, nor Washington fought in a war against the US, for the purpose of persevering the institution of slavery.
The Confederates who are honored with statues would unlikely be known at all to us were it not for their part in a war fought to preserve human slavery.

[Laker14]

Whatever side your on, one question I always wondered about.

If people insist on confederate statues being removed for whatever reason,
who is paying for the machinery and man power to remove them??:shrug:

Can you say "the tax payers".

If these groups insist on removeable, let them collect the funds to pay the removal.

And if I don't agree with the dollars being spent on the US defense spending, and you do, then you can pay for it, and I get a free ride. You got a deal.

[Bay Kid]

But neither Lincoln, nor Washington fought in a war against the US, for the purpose of persevering the institution of slavery.
The Confederates who are honored with statues would unlikely be known at all to us were it not for their part in a war fought to preserve human slavery.

Taxation

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Where we are today. National debt is now 30 Trillion dollars. I seem to be one of the only who realize I do not comprehend one trillion let alone 30 of them. We chat about billions. Hey a million here a million there get 100 million together before another 100 million and oops we have one trillion. No need to ask if an expense is worth while we are not even actually printing it. Most of the debt is just computer notes. No one is even asking you owe us half a trillion we owe you a trillion so REALITY we owe you not a trillion but half a trillion.

I think that these measurements are a bit off but you get get a good idea of how much a trillion is.

I was told that a stack of $100 bills equalling one million dollars is about a foot high. (It may be a bit less.)

A stack of $100 dollar bills equalling a billion dollars would be taller than the Empire State Building.

A trillion dollars would be represented by one thousand stacks of $100 the height of the Empire State building.

Picture an island of one thousand stacks of $100 bills the height of the Empire State building.

Now picture 30 of those islands.

It's still a bit difficult to get the idea of more than a billion in your head. But it's a lot of money.

[Lottoguy]

It's still much cheaper then 450+ holes of golf which includes helicopter rides and security for dozens.

[Byte1]

But neither Lincoln, nor Washington fought in a war against the US, for the purpose of persevering the institution of slavery.
The Confederates who are honored with statues would unlikely be known at all to us were it not for their part in a war fought to preserve human slavery.

So, just to clarify a statue of a slave owner is OK, but a statue of a Soldier that may not even have had a slave has to be removed? So, everyone else on here is talking slave ownership (which some documentation suggests was by a black man FIRST in the U.S.) and you say the idea is to tear down what you deem to be are "traitor" statues? I don't think that is the consensus.

[Byte1]

So, the idea is that we should tear down, remove, eliminate all references to anything in history that shows unfavorable on our country. That way, no one will ever know our blemished history. We should not have any reminders, so that when a few years or decades down the road, there will be questions without answers. Slavery never existed and the Civil War never happened. When are we going to rid ourselves of those nasty reminders in D.C. like the Vietnam Veterans wall, or the WWII memorial, etc. After all, American soldiers killed a lot of Asians and Europeans in our violent history.
History=bad
WOK = good

[jdulej]

So, the idea is that we should tear down, remove, eliminate all references to anything in history that shows unfavorable on our country. That way, no one will ever know our blemished history. We should not have any reminders, so that when a few years or decades down the road, there will be questions without answers. Slavery never existed and the Civil War never happened. When are we going to rid ourselves of those nasty reminders in D.C. like the Vietnam Veterans wall, or the WWII memorial, etc. After all, American soldiers killed a lot of Asians and Europeans in our violent history.
History=bad
WOK = good
That's not what I think. IMO, if someone or some group wants to honor a traitor, they should show that person in an appropriate pose such as bowing his/her head in shame or something like that. This thread morphed into a debate over who was nicer or did more bad things. To me, the point was - why would we honor a traitor? Simple as that. Does not matter how nice or mean they were.

[Byte1]

That's not what I think. IMO, if someone or some group wants to honor a traitor, they should show that person in an appropriate pose such as bowing his/her head in shame or something like that. This thread morphed into a debate over who was nicer or did more bad things. To me, the point was - why would we honor a traitor? Simple as that. Does not matter how nice or mean they were.

You believe that the soldier was a traitor and many believe they were/are memorializing an American soldier, regardless of his state that he was defending. And yes, many were just defending their state when they were fighting. If they would have run up North and fought for the Union, then their families would have been punished by their own neighbors and their land would have been seized. Of course, the North DID seize their land and in many cases gave it to the freed slaves. That is just one way to look at it. I used to think of the Southern soldiers as traitors, but have "evolved" in my view. Now, I look at them as my countrymen that were put in unfortunate circumstances and were STILL loyal to their state and what would eventually be their version of country.
Not to change the subject but Floyd was a career criminal and he died. Now, he is memorialized with a statue honoring him. For what? Perhaps as a reminder that he was forgiven by the people and remembered as a criminal that died during an altercation with the police? Was he a traitor? Was he remembered as a criminal with the statue?
The statues were landmarks. The statues were a reminder of what our country had to suffer through in its growing stage. The statues were a reminder of how patriotic or loyal our fellow countrymen are, even if possibly misled. Remember, many think that Vietnam involvement was wrong, even to the point of ostracizing our Vets upon their return.
In war we do not hate the enemy. Many of us respect their bravery when they fight us, considering the overwhelming odds of them beating us.
Just my two cents. I am not insulted by Confederate statues. I am not shamed by them. I am not insulted by statues of Columbus or Indigenous natives of America. I think a statue of Floyd is ironic and ridiculous, but that is what the people of that city wished and that is what they got.

[jdulej]

You believe that the soldier was a traitor and many believe they were/are memorializing an American soldier, regardless of his state that he was defending. And yes, many were just defending their state when they were fighting. If they would have run up North and fought for the Union, then their families would have been punished by their own neighbors and their land would have been seized. Of course, the North DID seize their land and in many cases gave it to the freed slaves. That is just one way to look at it. I used to think of the Southern soldiers as traitors, but have "evolved" in my view. Now, I look at them as my countrymen that were put in unfortunate circumstances and were STILL loyal to their state and what would eventually be their version of country.
Not to change the subject but Floyd was a career criminal and he died. Now, he is memorialized with a statue honoring him. For what? Perhaps as a reminder that he was forgiven by the people and remembered as a criminal that died during an altercation with the police? Was he a traitor? Was he remembered as a criminal with the statue?
The statues were landmarks. The statues were a reminder of what our country had to suffer through in its growing stage. The statues were a reminder of how patriotic or loyal our fellow countrymen are, even if possibly misled. Remember, many think that Vietnam involvement was wrong, even to the point of ostracizing our Vets upon their return.
In war we do not hate the enemy. Many of us respect their bravery when they fight us, considering the overwhelming odds of them beating us.
Just my two cents. I am not insulted by Confederate statues. I am not shamed by them. I am not insulted by statues of Columbus or Indigenous natives of America. I think a statue of Floyd is ironic and ridiculous, but that is what the people of that city wished and that is what they got.
Sorry, this thread has gone on for so long that we are repeating ourselves. I posted this several hundred (it seems) post ago - to me the only traitors are the leaders of the traitorous event - not solders, or workers. Again, to repeat, you can blame Floyd's killers for making him a martyr, not Floyd, who would have continued to be a US citizen/petty criminal were it not for that act.

[GrumpyOldMan]

So, the idea is that we should tear down, remove, eliminate all references to anything in history that shows unfavorable on our country. That way, no one will ever know our blemished history. We should not have any reminders, so that when a few years or decades down the road, there will be questions without answers. Slavery never existed and the Civil War never happened. When are we going to rid ourselves of those nasty reminders in D.C. like the Vietnam Veterans wall, or the WWII memorial, etc. After all, American soldiers killed a lot of Asians and Europeans in our violent history.
History=bad
WOK = good

I see nothing to support your comment. The statues are of traitors. If you want statues on your property, then erect one. Nothing stopping you. No one is saying we should not teach about traitors, but what I see is people here honoring traitors, and even denying they were traitors. That is certainly rewriting history.

See any NAZI flags in Germany? See any statues of Hitler? See any statues of Saddam Husain.

I firmly believe we should accurately teach our children about our history, both the good and the bad. As a vet I am totally opposed to honoring anyone that that’s up arm against our country.

[JMintzer]

I see nothing to support your comment. The statues are of traitors. If you want statues on your property, then erect one. Nothing stopping you. No one is saying we should not teach about traitors, but what I see is people here honoring traitors, and even denying they were traitors. That is certainly rewriting history.

See any NAZI flags in Germany? See any statues of Hitler? See any statues of Saddam Husain.

I firmly believe we should accurately teach our children about our history, both the good and the bad. As a vet I am totally opposed to honoring anyone that that’s up arm against our country.

The US Government did not consider them to be traitors...

No matter how many times you repeat yourself...

[Ben Franklin]

I have to laugh at those who are upset that taxpayers are paying to remove statues of American traitors. How much did it cost taxpayers to design, create, and put up those statues in the first place? SMH.

Slavery is a hateful, arrogant, dehumanizing and disgusting belief system.

[jdulej]

The US Government did not consider them to be traitors...

No matter how many times you repeat yourself...

Huh. I thought they were pardoned rather than punished for their actions. If they were not traitors, why pardon them? Just drop whatever charges there were. I think the administration at the time held their noses and pardoned everyone for the sake of bringing the issue to an end - which didn't work too well given this thread.

[stadry]

i f you're thinking 'lee' he honorably resigned from the us army prior to assuming command of confederate forces therefore, by definition he could not commit treason.. currently wiley is much closer

[Ben Franklin]

i f you're thinking 'lee' he honorably resigned from the us army prior to assuming command of confederate forces therefore, by definition he could not commit treason.. currently wiley is much closer

Wiley? Who is Wiley? Wiley Coyote? Is he one those 47 US Rep. Senators who went over a President's head and sent Iran a letter? I don't recall a Wiley in that bunch.

[stadry]

appears some still don't understand the definition of treason...please inform & educate yourselves

[Bay Kid]

So, the idea is that we should tear down, remove, eliminate all references to anything in history that shows unfavorable on our country. That way, no one will ever know our blemished history. We should not have any reminders, so that when a few years or decades down the road, there will be questions without answers. Slavery never existed and the Civil War never happened. When are we going to rid ourselves of those nasty reminders in D.C. like the Vietnam Veterans wall, or the WWII memorial, etc. After all, American soldiers killed a lot of Asians and Europeans in our violent history.
History=bad
WOK = good

After all American history is removed will THEY feel better?

[Byte1]

I see nothing to support your comment. The statues are of traitors. If you want statues on your property, then erect one. Nothing stopping you. No one is saying we should not teach about traitors, but what I see is people here honoring traitors, and even denying they were traitors. That is certainly rewriting history.

See any NAZI flags in Germany? See any statues of Hitler? See any statues of Saddam Husain.

I firmly believe we should accurately teach our children about our history, both the good and the bad. As a vet I am totally opposed to honoring anyone that that’s up arm against our country.

So, you would not have a problem with your neighbor flying a Confederate battle flag on their property?

The idea of a confederate soldier being a traitor is not being realistic. Perhaps a leader of the movement being a traitor, sure. But, a soldier fighting for his state to protect his family from harm is hardly being a traitor; it's being realistic and defending his family and property. Yes, the war was about rebellion. I understand that. But, I also notice how easy it has been recently to proclaim anyone that does not agree with someone's opinion, to be a traitor. That word gets bandied about quite a bit today.
Personally, I have no skin in the game. My family was not here during the Civil(oxymoron) War and NONE of my family has ever owned a slave. But, I have an opinion on statues. If one has no problem with other statues of people, such as Floyd (as an example) then I do not see why anyone would want to destroy statues that suddenly (after decades) become a sensitive issue for the weak minded, that feel that by illuminating something that they do not favor, it will make change history.
Who decides the act as being traitorous? The winner, of course. During the revolution, American colonists such as General Washington were traitors in the opinion of Brittan. American Indians (indigenous) were the enemy in the past, because the interlopers were the winners.
A statue only represents a historically significant event. It is not dangerous; nothing more dangerous than a library history text book. I am sure that folks know when they see a confederate soldier that he represented a blemish in American history. Taking down a statue should not be done by a minority group that makes the most noise. It should be voted upon by the local residents, as to whether or not they wish it removed. After all, it is THEIR town/city. It's the DEMOCRATICALLY correct method.
By the way, we are NOT Germany. Do you think that if we had lost, that Germany would not have statues of Hitler?

[JMintzer]

I have to laugh at those who are upset that taxpayers are paying to remove statues of American traitors. How much did it cost taxpayers to design, create, and put up those statues in the first place? SMH.

Slavery is a hateful, arrogant, dehumanizing and disgusting belief system.

Many, if not most were paid for with private funds...

[jdulej]

Many, if not most were paid for with private funds...

I wonder if part of the private funding went to pay the city/county/state for the space the statue occupied?

[Chi-Town]

Taking the statues down is a one time cost. Putting up and taking down fencing to protect our Capitol and Supreme Court appears to be a recurring cost.

[Michael G.]

Wait, soon they will start on Mt Rushmore

[Bay Kid]

After removal what will THEY replace them with? Monument Ave. in Richmond, VA will need all new, but with what?

[Byte1]

After removal what will THEY replace them with? Monument Ave. in Richmond, VA will need all new, but with what?

Rainbows? :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[JMintzer]

Rainbows? :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

And Unicorns...

[Chi-Town]

Monument Ave has one statue left, Arthur Ashe, who was born and raised in Richmond. Perhaps other local dignitaries can fill the remaining pedestals. The Lee one is huge with a traffic circle.

[Laker14]

After removal what will THEY replace them with? Monument Ave. in Richmond, VA will need all new, but with what?

Rainbows? :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

And Unicorns...

Rainbows and unicorns would be an improvement over statues glorifying those who fought to preserve the institution of human slavery.
Doesn't seem to me that should be such a difficult concept to grasp.
From Robert E. Lee's great-great-great nephew, according to Smithsonian Magazine: "I see them as idolatries," Rev. Robert Lee IV told ABC News last year. "They have been created into idols of white supremacy and racism."

Those of you who claim that statues honoring the Confederacy were erected to "preserve history" are missing the boat. They were erected to glorify the concept of the Confederacy, which includes human slavery, and white supremacy.
By all means, the fact that these attitudes were considered not only normal, but just, and the divine right of the White Race should be included in every curriculum in the United States.
It should be forever taught, that Alexander H Stephens, the Vice President of the Confederacy, proudly spoke the following, as justification for the secession of the Confederate States,
"Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth"

That , folks, is the essence of the Confederacy. While honorable men fought honorably for its survival, it should never be whitewashed, or forgotten, exactly what they were fighting for.

[JMintzer]

Rainbows and unicorns would be an improvement over statues glorifying those who fought to preserve the institution of human slavery.
Doesn't seem to me that should be such a difficult concept to grasp.
From Robert E. Lee's great-great-great nephew, according to Smithsonian Magazine: "I see them as idolatries," Rev. Robert Lee IV told ABC News last year. "They have been created into idols of white supremacy and racism."

Those of you who claim that statues honoring the Confederacy were erected to "preserve history" are missing the boat. They were erected to glorify the concept of the Confederacy, which includes human slavery, and white supremacy.
By all means, the fact that these attitudes were considered not only normal, but just, and the divine right of the White Race should be included in every curriculum in the United States.
It should be forever taught, that Alexander H Stephens, the Vice President of the Confederacy, proudly spoke the following, as justification for the secession of the Confederate States,
"Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth"

That , folks, is the essence of the Confederacy. While honorable men fought honorably for its survival, it should never be whitewashed, or forgotten, exactly what they were fighting for.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3b/Paris_Tuileries_Garden_Facepalm_statue.jpg

[Byte1]

Rainbows and unicorns would be an improvement over statues glorifying those who fought to preserve the institution of human slavery.
Doesn't seem to me that should be such a difficult concept to grasp.
From Robert E. Lee's great-great-great nephew, according to Smithsonian Magazine: "I see them as idolatries," Rev. Robert Lee IV told ABC News last year. "They have been created into idols of white supremacy and racism."

Those of you who claim that statues honoring the Confederacy were erected to "preserve history" are missing the boat. They were erected to glorify the concept of the Confederacy, which includes human slavery, and white supremacy.
By all means, the fact that these attitudes were considered not only normal, but just, and the divine right of the White Race should be included in every curriculum in the United States.
It should be forever taught, that Alexander H Stephens, the Vice President of the Confederacy, proudly spoke the following, as justification for the secession of the Confederate States,
"Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth"

That , folks, is the essence of the Confederacy. While honorable men fought honorably for its survival, it should never be whitewashed, or forgotten, exactly what they were fighting for.

And yet, the reminders MUST be removed. Out of sight, out of mind. "Whitewash" history? Or, how about blacked out as if it never happened?
Like I have said before, those soldiers were NOT fighting to preserve slavery. They were fighting for their homes. Very few soldiers ever owned slaves.

[Laker14]

And yet, the reminders MUST be removed. Out of sight, out of mind. "Whitewash" history? Or, how about blacked out as if it never happened?
Like I have said before, those soldiers were NOT fighting to preserve slavery. They were fighting for their homes. Very few soldiers ever owned slaves.

Teaching the history, making the history available, are different tasks than glorifying the symbols of white supremacy and the defenders of slavery.

[Ben Franklin]

And yet, the reminders MUST be removed. Out of sight, out of mind. "Whitewash" history? Or, how about blacked out as if it never happened?
Like I have said before, those soldiers were NOT fighting to preserve slavery. They were fighting for their homes. Very few soldiers ever owned slaves.

"The Cornerstone Speech, also known as the Cornerstone Address, was an oration given by Alexander H. Stephens, Vice President of the Confederate States of America, at the Athenaeum in Savannah, Georgia, on March 21, 1861.

Here's the exerpt: "..."our new government['s] foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery—subordination to the superior race—is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth..."

So, no. They weren't fighting to save their homes. They actually believed they were superior to black people.

[tvbound]

Teaching the history, making the history available, are different tasks than glorifying the symbols of white supremacy and the defenders of slavery.

You are absolutely correct. Put the statues and monuments of the traitors on any private land that will have/want them, just don't glorify that behavior on public land. True and factual history is history and will never change (except possibly by some heretofore unknown legitimate document/facts, that haven't previously been known to exist) by the location of some statue, monument or plaque. It isn't really that hard of a concept to comprehend.

[JMintzer]

"The Cornerstone Speech, also known as the Cornerstone Address, was an oration given by Alexander H. Stephens, Vice President of the Confederate States of America, at the Athenaeum in Savannah, Georgia, on March 21, 1861.

Here's the exerpt: "..."our new government['s] foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery—subordination to the superior race—is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth..."

So, no. They weren't fighting to save their homes. They actually believed they were superior to black people.

Did you miss that 3/5s compromise demanded by the North?

[Laker14]

Did you miss that 3/5s compromise demanded by the North?

I didn't miss it, I just don't see your point. Please expound.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

You are absolutely correct. Put the statues and monuments of the traitors on any private land that will have/want them, just don't glorify that behavior on public land. True and factual history is history and will never change (except possibly by some heretofore unknown legitimate document/facts, that haven't previously been known to exist) by the location of some statue, monument or plaque. It isn't really that hard of a concept to comprehend.

I can see these statues being placed in a central clearing, encircled by a round museum several stories high. So you wouldn't be able to see the statues at all unless you were inside the museum or went out into the central courtyard where they were prominently on display with plaques to explain their significance.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

I didn't miss it, I just don't see your point. Please expound.

It's called "what-aboutism." Common posting style.

[Laker14]

So, the idea is that we should tear down, remove, eliminate all references to anything in history that shows unfavorable on our country. That way, no one will ever know our blemished history. We should not have any reminders, so that when a few years or decades down the road, there will be questions without answers. Slavery never existed and the Civil War never happened. When are we going to rid ourselves of those nasty reminders in D.C. like the Vietnam Veterans wall, or the WWII memorial, etc. After all, American soldiers killed a lot of Asians and Europeans in our violent history.
History=bad
WOK = good

are you seriously worried that if we remove statues honoring slave owning generals fighting to preserve white supremacy and human slavery, that we will forget the Civil War, and the institution of slavery? Really?
Is it your position that the people who want these statues removed also want us to forget that a Great War was fought over the issue of whether or not human slavery was to be allowed to continue in our country?
Take a moment and consider that position.

[tvbound]

It's called "what-aboutism." Common posting style.

Not just in posting, but in general life conversations/debates. The equivalent of someone being proved wrong, but instead of being ethical and having the integrity in admitting it, they prefer to say - "look, over there, a shiny object."

[Byte1]

are you seriously worried that if we remove statues honoring slave owning generals fighting to preserve white supremacy and human slavery, that we will forget the Civil War, and the institution of slavery? Really?
Is it your position that the people who want these statues removed also want us to forget that a Great War was fought over the issue of whether or not human slavery was to be allowed to continue in our country?
Take a moment and consider that position.

I guess you want to take down Lincoln's statues too?

[Byte1]

Teaching the history, making the history available, are different tasks than glorifying the symbols of white supremacy and the defenders of slavery.

The war was not about "white supremacy and defenders of slavery." No one is "glorifying" it. If you are ashamed of YOUR history, that's a personal problem. Since it was NOT my heritage, the statues do not bother me. I am interested in why after decades, today's overly sensitive people are more worried about erasing or perverting the past than fixing, healing the present. I can understand the idea of removing the confederate battle flag from gov buildings, but being intimidated and scared of a few historic statues in pretty amusing. Personally, I don't care what you do with the statues, but I think it is pathetic to cater to a few sensitive folks. Interesting how many flags of other countries are flown daily, even in the Villages. That doesn't bother anyone? I know that some are sensitive to political flags flown.

I believe that Lincoln was president when boat loads of blacks were shipped off to what is known as Liberia, as an experiment on getting rid of all slaves. There seems to be plenty of blame to go around for anyone that lived in that period.
One of the first slave owners was a black man from Virginia.
The Civil War was more about the economics in the South than slavery as an institution.
Take reminders of President Clinton down because he was a sexist and adulterer.
Take President Kennedy's reminders down because he was a sexist and adulterer.
Take Johnson's reminders down because he was a racist.
Destroy all reminders of the internment camps for Japanese-American citizens because they are an embarrassment to our country.
But, by all means get rid or YOUR evidence of the Civil war. :clap2:

[JMintzer]

I didn't miss it, I just don't see your point. Please expound.

Just commenting on your (cherry picked) quote by Stephens, believing whites were superior to blacks, while ignoring that northerners had the exact same opinion...

[JMintzer]

I can see these statues being placed in a central clearing, encircled by a round museum several stories high. So you wouldn't be able to see the statues at all unless you were inside the museum or went out into the central courtyard where they were prominently on display with plaques to explain their significance.

Where is this mythical museum to be constructed? Who will protect it from those who demand it be torn down?

[JMintzer]

It's called "what-aboutism." Common posting style.

No, it's called "context"...

[JMintzer]

are you seriously worried that if we remove statues honoring slave owning generals fighting to preserve white supremacy and human slavery, that we will forget the Civil War, and the institution of slavery? Really?
Is it your position that the people who want these statues removed also want us to forget that a Great War was fought over the issue of whether or not human slavery was to be allowed to continue in our country?
Take a moment and consider that position.

You should consider ALL of the things the Civil War was about...

[JMintzer]

The war was not about "white supremacy and defenders of slavery." No one is "glorifying" it. If you are ashamed of YOUR history, that's a personal problem. Since it was NOT my heritage, the statues do not bother me. I am interested in why after decades, today's overly sensitive people are more worried about erasing or perverting the past than fixing, healing the present. I can understand the idea of removing the confederate battle flag from gov buildings, but being intimidated and scared of a few historic statues in pretty amusing. Personally, I don't care what you do with the statues, but I think it is pathetic to cater to a few sensitive folks. Interesting how many flags of other countries are flown daily, even in the Villages. That doesn't bother anyone? I know that some are sensitive to political flags flown.

I believe that Lincoln was president when boat loads of blacks were shipped off to what is known as Liberia, as an experiment on getting rid of all slaves. There seems to be plenty of blame to go around for anyone that lived in that period.
One of the first slave owners was a black man from Virginia.
The Civil War was more about the economics in the South than slavery as an institution.
Take reminders of President Clinton down because he was a sexist and adulterer.
Take President Kennedy's reminders down because he was a sexist and adulterer.
Take Johnson's reminders down because he was a racist.
Destroy all reminders of the internment camps for Japanese-American citizens because they are an embarrassment to our country.
But, by all means get rid or YOUR evidence of the Civil war. :clap2:

I agree with the content of this post...

[Laker14]

I agree with the content of this post...

The war was not about "white supremacy and defenders of slavery." No one is "glorifying" it. If you are ashamed of YOUR history, that's a personal problem. Since it was NOT my heritage, the statues do not bother me. I am interested in why after decades, today's overly sensitive people are more worried about erasing or perverting the past than fixing, healing the present. I can understand the idea of removing the confederate battle flag from gov buildings, but being intimidated and scared of a few historic statues in pretty amusing. Personally, I don't care what you do with the statues, but I think it is pathetic to cater to a few sensitive folks. Interesting how many flags of other countries are flown daily, even in the Villages. That doesn't bother anyone? I know that some are sensitive to political flags flown.

I believe that Lincoln was president when boat loads of blacks were shipped off to what is known as Liberia, as an experiment on getting rid of all slaves. There seems to be plenty of blame to go around for anyone that lived in that period.
One of the first slave owners was a black man from Virginia.
The Civil War was more about the economics in the South than slavery as an institution.
Take reminders of President Clinton down because he was a sexist and adulterer.
Take President Kennedy's reminders down because he was a sexist and adulterer.
Take Johnson's reminders down because he was a racist.
Destroy all reminders of the internment camps for Japanese-American citizens because they are an embarrassment to our country.
But, by all means get rid or YOUR evidence of the Civil war. :clap2:

You've got the Vice President of the Confederacy saying, point blank that the cornerstone of the Confederacy is the supremacy of the white race, and that the negro's place is subservient to the white man,
and one of you posts that the war was not about either of those two things, and the other agrees with that post.
Talk about whitewashing history, talk about changing history, right in the face of iron clad evidence, well,folks, there you have it.

[Laker14]

You should consider ALL of the things the Civil War was about...

And you should understand that while there were many issues of conflict between the two sides of the war, the only one that the south could not, and would not abide, and would not compromise on, was the issue of slavery.
As a matter of fact, the north was willing to allow slavery to continue in the states where it was already established. It was the disagreement about whether or not new states would be allowed to become slave states, based upon their own volition, as opposed to a Federal prohibition on the institution of slavery in new territories and eventually the states that they would become, that was the ground upon which they would not compromise.
Nobody here is saying the north was innocent of the sin of white supremacy over the negro (using the accepted terminology of the time). In fact there was no allowance for equality for the black man, following the Emancipation Proclamation.

Given all of that, as proclaimed by Alexander Stephens, the Confederacy was founded on the principle that the White Man was superior to the Black Man, and it was the White Man's right to hold the Black Man a slave, and the war was fought to preserve that ideal and that institution.
To claim otherwise is, to borrow from another thread, to claim "the grass is blue".

[Laker14]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3b/Paris_Tuileries_Garden_Facepalm_statue.jpg

Oh look! A shiny object!

[JMintzer]

Oh look! A shiny object!

No, it's a statue...

[JMintzer]

You've got the Vice President of the Confederacy saying, point blank that the cornerstone of the Confederacy is the supremacy of the white race, and that the negro's place is subservient to the white man,
and one of you posts that the war was not about either of those two things, and the other agrees with that post.
Talk about whitewashing history, talk about changing history, right in the face of iron clad evidence, well,folks, there you have it.

So, Robt E. Lee's comments about the horror of slavery means nothing... And Lincon's statement that if he could preserve the Union without freeing a single slave means nothing...

But sure, carry on...

[Byte1]

And you should understand that while there were many issues of conflict between the two sides of the war, the only one that the south could not, and would not abide, and would not compromise on, was the issue of slavery.
As a matter of fact, the north was willing to allow slavery to continue in the states where it was already established. It was the disagreement about whether or not new states would be allowed to become slave states, based upon their own volition, as opposed to a Federal prohibition on the institution of slavery in new territories and eventually the states that they would become, that was the ground upon which they would not compromise.
Nobody here is saying the north was innocent of the sin of white supremacy over the negro (using the accepted terminology of the time). In fact there was no allowance for equality for the black man, following the Emancipation Proclamation.

Given all of that, as proclaimed by Alexander Stephens, the Confederacy was founded on the principle that the White Man was superior to the Black Man, and it was the White Man's right to hold the Black Man a slave, and the war was fought to preserve that ideal and that institution.
To claim otherwise is, to borrow from another thread, to claim "the grass is blue".

Ah yes, Alexander Stephens governor of Georgia from 1882 until his death in 1883. Also a friend of Abraham Lincoln. Not sure, did they remove his statue yet? I believe he was against succession, if I am not mistaken. He was undoubtedly a racist. In his time, his view was fairly common. Kind of makes one wonder how Senator Byrd (grand dragon of the KKK) managed to make it into the 21st century in our government. Good friends of the Clintons. Time to get rid of some more monuments that are more current. :)

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Ah yes, Alexander Stephens governor of Georgia from 1882 until his death in 1883. Also a friend of Abraham Lincoln. Not sure, did they remove his statue yet? I believe he was against succession, if I am not mistaken. He was undoubtedly a racist. In his time, his view was fairly common. Kind of makes one wonder how Senator Byrd (grand dragon of the KKK) managed to make it into the 21st century in our government. Good friends of the Clintons. Time to get rid of some more monuments that are more current. :)

1. Byrd wasn't the Grand Dragon. He was the Exalted Cylops of his own local Klan group.
2. He later publicly apologized for being a member, and warned young people in an interview to NOT join the Klan.

3. He wrote, in a note to a segregationalist senator from Mississippi, "I shall never fight in the armed forces with a negro by my side ... Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds."

If you want to defend that, or excuse it as a reflection of the times, or think it's not nearly as bad as whatever you want to "what about" this week....

if this doesn't mortify you, and horrify you, and make you feel grateful as hell we don't live in that time now, and doesn't make you want to do whatever you can to ensure that it never happens again....

then you're just another white supremacist, and that would explain your attitude toward this topic.

Yes, it was a different time, then. We have evolved. If you don't like it, go find yourself a hole somewhere where you can pretend you're still in the slave days and put a sign on the front of your cave that says "no negros allowed."

You might as well, because that's how you feel.

[Laker14]

So, Robt E. Lee's comments about the horror of slavery means nothing... And Lincon's statement that if he could preserve the Union without freeing a single slave means nothing...

But sure, carry on...

They mean everything. They just don't serve as an argument against the Civil War being about the preservation of human slavery.

[JMintzer]

1. Byrd wasn't the Grand Dragon. He was the Exalted Cylops of his own local Klan group.

So that makes it better?

2. He later publicly apologized for being a member, and warned young people in an interview to NOT join the Klan.

3. He wrote, in a note to a segregationalist senator from Mississippi, "I shall never fight in the armed forces with a negro by my side ... Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds."

If you want to defend that, or excuse it as a reflection of the times, or think it's not nearly as bad as whatever you want to "what about" this week....

So, an apology is all that's needed? Then Robt E Lee's statue should remain. He was against slavery and made sure, in his will, that his heirs would not receive their inheritance if they owned a slave...

if this doesn't mortify you, and horrify you, and make you feel grateful as hell we don't live in that time now, and doesn't make you want to do whatever you can to ensure that it never happens again....

Yes, that horrifies me. So why are you so quick to defend Byrd?

then you're just another white supremacist, and that would explain your attitude toward this topic.

Nice insult!

Yes, it was a different time, then. We have evolved. If you don't like it, go find yourself a hole somewhere where you can pretend you're still in the slave days and put a sign on the front of your cave that says "no negros allowed."

You might as well, because that's how you feel.

WOW! Once again, you insult those you disagree with...

I'm beginning to think you're simply projecting...

[Byte1]

1. Byrd wasn't the Grand Dragon. He was the Exalted Cylops of his own local Klan group.
2. He later publicly apologized for being a member, and warned young people in an interview to NOT join the Klan.

3. He wrote, in a note to a segregationalist senator from Mississippi, "I shall never fight in the armed forces with a negro by my side ... Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds."

If you want to defend that, or excuse it as a reflection of the times, or think it's not nearly as bad as whatever you want to "what about" this week....

if this doesn't mortify you, and horrify you, and make you feel grateful as hell we don't live in that time now, and doesn't make you want to do whatever you can to ensure that it never happens again....

then you're just another white supremacist, and that would explain your attitude toward this topic.

Yes, it was a different time, then. We have evolved. If you don't like it, go find yourself a hole somewhere where you can pretend you're still in the slave days and put a sign on the front of your cave that says "no negros allowed."

You might as well, because that's how you feel.

Like I said, I am not a Karen and get emotional and sensitive over the past. Like I also said, my family had nothing to do with the Civil War and slavery or the endorsement of such. Accusing me of being a racist or white supremacist when you do not know me or my background would be humorous if not so pathetic and ridiculous. My discussion had to do with the removal of historic reminders in the guise of racism. I think that some folks have way too much time and not enough controversial events to focus on so they dig up stupid ideas to divide the population into groups. I doubt that anyone on here is a true racist and definitely not a supremacist. But, I have been fooled before. I was once fooled into thinking that folks on here could have an intelligent conversation without some sensitive individuals calling them names. But, rather than being fooled perhaps I am just mistaken?

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

My discussion had to do with the removal of historic reminders in the guise of racism.

These statues of Confederate Heroes, are not being removed as "historic reminders in the guise of racism." They are being removed as "historic reminders OF racism."

No one needs to have "yes, the south was, and still is racist" shoved in their faces every time they want to visit a public park.

If that sentiment bothers you, then look inward as to why.

[JMintzer]

Like I said, I am not a Karen and get emotional and sensitive over the past. Like I also said, my family had nothing to do with the Civil War and slavery or the endorsement of such. Accusing me of being a racist or white supremacist when you do not know me or my background would be humorous if not so pathetic and ridiculous. My discussion had to do with the removal of historic reminders in the guise of racism. I think that some folks have way too much time and not enough controversial events to focus on so they dig up stupid ideas to divide the population into groups. I doubt that anyone on here is a true racist and definitely not a supremacist. But, I have been fooled before. I was once fooled into thinking that folks on here could have an intelligent conversation without some sensitive individuals calling them names. But, rather than being fooled perhaps I am just mistaken?

Nah, calling people "White Supremacists" is just an attempt to shut them up...

Another member called me the same.. Funny, as a Jew, the "White Supremacists" would never have me as a member... Go figure...

Curing the Civil War, my family was running for their lives, from the Pogroms...

[JMintzer]

These statues of Confederate Heroes, are not being removed as "historic reminders in the guise of racism." They are being removed as "historic reminders OF racism."

No one needs to have "yes, the south was, and still is racist" shoved in their faces every time they want to visit a public park.

If that sentiment bothers you, then look inward as to why.

Good thing there's no racism in the North...

Wait, what?

[Byte1]

These statues of Confederate Heroes, are not being removed as "historic reminders in the guise of racism." They are being removed as "historic reminders OF racism."

No one needs to have "yes, the south was, and still is racist" shoved in their faces every time they want to visit a public park.

If that sentiment bothers you, then look inward as to why.

You first.
Didn't seem to bother anyone for the past hundred years. But, then again maybe they knew something we don't? Or, maybe they weren't "sensitive" to "feelings."
Thanks for the laugh today. My wife almost fell out of her chair laughing at my being called a racist and white supremacist. Maybe some day I'll let you in on the reason.
Sorry, not your fault. Some folks are just emotional and take a discussion and make it into an AGENDA and take any controversial subject and make a verbal war of it.
Yes, tear down those bad statues. Plant a tree for the tree huggers. Hey, don't get me wrong, I love trees. Especially fruit trees, because they make good fuel for smoking meat. :clap2:

[Laker14]

Hey, I love you all. We disagree. I bet if I met you out on the town, I'd like you.
It's been a good conversation. I think it's time we move on.
Peace.

[tonycirocco@me.com]

A few broken windows!!!!!!!!!!
A goofier statement can not be made than that.

[Bay Kid]

Most of the future generations will never know the real history of our country. It will all be whatever the mind bending education will teach them. SAD

[mikebama]

Politicians never worry about spending other People’s money.

[ThirdOfFive]

You first.
Didn't seem to bother anyone for the past hundred years. But, then again maybe they knew something we don't? Or, maybe they weren't "sensitive" to "feelings."
Thanks for the laugh today. My wife almost fell out of her chair laughing at my being called a racist and white supremacist. Maybe some day I'll let you in on the reason.
Sorry, not your fault. Some folks are just emotional and take a discussion and make it into an AGENDA and take any controversial subject and make a verbal war of it.
Yes, tear down those bad statues. Plant a tree for the tree huggers. Hey, don't get me wrong, I love trees. Especially fruit trees, because they make good fuel for smoking meat. :clap2:
Good points.

This all started back in 2016 as part of that "tantrum a week" flurry that plagued America. Confederate statues, metoo, people having their "bathroom rights" violated or something...I'm sure people can remember a lot of the others. I prefer not to.

I have no doubt that there ARE sincere people who want the statues removed for righteous reasons. But for others, it is nothing more than virtue-signaling, and all that posturing is beyond a bit tiresome.

Maybe we need to grow up.

[MDLNB]

"The Cornerstone Speech, also known as the Cornerstone Address, was an oration given by Alexander H. Stephens, Vice President of the Confederate States of America, at the Athenaeum in Savannah, Georgia, on March 21, 1861.

Here's the exerpt: "..."our new government['s] foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery—subordination to the superior race—is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth..."

So, no. They weren't fighting to save their homes. They actually believed they were superior to black people.


Did Alex Stephens speak for ALL of the Southern soldiers? Fine, then have the statue removed PROPERLY, not by rioters and protesters.

[Ben Franklin]

Did Alex Stephens speak for ALL of the Southern soldiers? Fine, then have the statue removed PROPERLY, not by rioters and protesters.

I would imagine they all felt the same way, as I never heard or read about any of them wanting to free slaves.

When the Patriots defeated the Bristish, American mobs pulled down the British statues, as seen in this illustration. It's a tradition, I suppose.

https://portside.org/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/field/image/king%20george.jpeg

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Did Alex Stephens speak for ALL of the Southern soldiers? Fine, then have the statue removed PROPERLY, not by rioters and protesters.

The statue was removed properly, by the state and town government, by order of Governor Northrom (I might have spelled that wrong). It was dismantled so that it could fit on flatbed trucks and moved off the premises. It'll be properly restored, cleaned, and stored, until it's placed in a more suitable location. Hopefully a museum where its history and significance can be better appreciated and understood.

[JMintzer]

The statue was removed properly, by the town government. It was dismantled so that it could fit on flatbed trucks and moved off the premises. It'll be properly restored, cleaned, and stored, until it's placed in a more suitable location. Hopefully a museum where its history and significance can be better appreciated and understood.

Yes, this mythical museum...

I'll take "Things that'll never happen" for $800, Alex...

[MDLNB]

I would imagine they all felt the same way, as I never heard or read about any of them wanting to free slaves.

When the Patriots defeated the Bristish, American mobs pulled down the British statues, as seen in this illustration. It's a tradition, I suppose.

https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/clear.gif


The majority of Southern soldiers did NOT own slaves. The soldiers were fighting for their homes and state, not for slavery.

[Bay Kid]

The majority of Southern soldiers did NOT own slaves. The soldiers were fighting for their homes and state, not for slavery.

The war was about taxes on farms for the most part.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

The war was about taxes on farms for the most part.

There were several causes of the Civil War. "States Rights" is brought up as a primary cause - but which rights are they talking about? Answer: The right to own slaves. The South wanted each state to maintain its right to allow slavery. The North wanted to abolish slavery, and the South insisted that infringed on the states' rights.

That was the PRIMARY cause of the war. There were other causes. But that was the big one. If there was no slavery, there likely would not have been a war.

[Byte1]

There were several causes of the Civil War. "States Rights" is brought up as a primary cause - but which rights are they talking about? Answer: The right to own slaves. The South wanted each state to maintain its right to allow slavery. The North wanted to abolish slavery, and the South insisted that infringed on the states' rights.

That was the PRIMARY cause of the war. There were other causes. But that was the big one. If there was no slavery, there likely would not have been a war.

I don't believe that. Slavery was going to disappear anyway. It was inevitable. Most of the concern in the South was over economics and the overreach of the Federal Government.

[JMintzer]

I don't believe that. Slavery was going to disappear anyway. It was inevitable. Most of the concern in the South was over economics and the overreach of the Federal Government.

Yup...

[Fredman]

Where we are today. National debt is now 30 Trillion dollars. I seem to be one of the only who realize I do not comprehend one trillion let alone 30 of them. We chat about billions. Hey a million here a million there get 100 million together before another 100 million and oops we have one trillion. No need to ask if an expense is worth while we are not even actually printing it. Most of the debt is just computer notes. No one is even asking you owe us half a trillion we owe you a trillion so REALITY we owe you not a trillion but half a trillion.


China is holding a lot of our debt, just hope that they don’t try to ask for the cash

[Bay Kid]

China is holding a lot of our debt, just hope that they don’t try to ask for the cash

We could just give them California and call it even.

[MDLNB]

We could just give them California and call it even.
I'm sure that giving them CA would be insulting to them. But, I would vote for it. :coolsmiley:

[jdulej]

I'm sure that giving them CA would be insulting to them. But, I would vote for it. :coolsmiley:

Careful, most of the southern and mid-western states would go broke without California tax money to bail them out every year.

An interesting tidbit you may not know - more people voted for Trump in California than did in Florida.

[MDLNB]

Careful, most of the southern and mid-western states would go broke without California tax money to bail them out every year.

An interesting tidbit you may not know - more people voted for Trump in California than did in Florida.


Not impressed. I'd still give it to China or back to Mexico. But make them take the citizens too. And no returns.

[jdulej]

Not impressed. I'd still give it to China or back to Mexico. But make them take the citizens too. And no returns.

I posted something like this on a different thread yesterday, but it fits here since California bashers seem to have arrived with the love-bugs.

Warning to those who hate California - history shows us that most things which start in California end up everywhere within about 10 years. Emission controls, seat belt requirements, ban of smoking, hot tubs, you name it. So get ready.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

I don't believe that. Slavery was going to disappear anyway. It was inevitable. Most of the concern in the South was over economics and the overreach of the Federal Government.

Yes, it was more economically beneficial for them to own slaves. They didn't have to PAY them. They were cheaper to care for than pack animals, easier to breed new ones by simply having Junior learn about the birds and the bees by raping a few of the females.

In fact, breeding new slaves was lucrative, they could earn money with healthy ones, selling them at auctions.

The South prospered on the backs (and in the wombs) of slaves. The north wanted to take that prosperity away.

[Chi-Town]

For you California doomsayers:

California Defies Doom With No. 1 U.S. Economy - Bloomberg (https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-06-14/california-defies-doom-with-no-1-u-s-economy)

[MDLNB]

Yes, it was more economically beneficial for them to own slaves. They didn't have to PAY them. They were cheaper to care for than pack animals, easier to breed new ones by simply having Junior learn about the birds and the bees by raping a few of the females.

In fact, breeding new slaves was lucrative, they could earn money with healthy ones, selling them at auctions.

The South prospered on the backs (and in the wombs) of slaves. The north wanted to take that prosperity away.


Obviously, someone has been watching reruns of Gone with the Wind.........:1rotfl::clap2:

[tvbound]

Obviously, someone has been watching reruns of Gone with the Wind.........:1rotfl::clap2:

Based on the number of posts, in different threads, it seems reruns of 'The Birth of A Nation' is even more popular down there.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Based on the number of posts, in different threads, it seems reruns of 'The Birth of A Nation' is even more popular down there.

You know, I didn't remember learning about this film, until I just looked it up thanks to your post. And it really does explain SO much about some of the attitudes here - on this forum, and in the community as a whole.

[tvbound]

You know, I didn't remember learning about this film, until I just looked it up thanks to your post. And it really does explain SO much about some of the attitudes here - on this forum, and in the community as a whole.

Good point, I should have included a link to it in my post, so here it is now.

100 Years Later, What's The Legacy Of 'Birth Of A Nation'? : Code Switch : NPR (https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2015/02/08/383279630/100-years-later-whats-the-legacy-of-birth-of-a-nation)