All things Charlottesville (merged)

[mariomike]

Should the US rename German towns because Nazis?

1. Anaheim, California
2. Carlsbad, California
3. Schaumburg, Illinois
4. Germantown, Maryland
5. Frederick, Maryland
6. Hoffman Estates, Illinois
7. New Berlin, Wisconsin
8. Germantown, Tennessee
9. Bremerton, Washington
10. New Braunfels, Texas

I've enjoyed my visits to Frankenmuth, Michigan. "Little Bavaria". I intend to keep going.

Should they ever decide to fly Swastikas, or erect Hitler statues, or rename it Hitlerville, I'll stop going.

 

[George Wallace]

Now here is a peaceful and creative way to deal with Neo-Nazis and any other Hard Left or Hard Right group:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8jJuJrJGDA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvjIYl_Nlao

 

[Jarnhamar]

And why should you care? It wasn't named after a nazi symbol way back in 1907.  Unlike many of the confederate statues that were placed during the Jim Crow years to assert white supremacy in those areas.  Not out of any fondness for historical figures...

Between 650'000 and 850'000 US soldiers died in the civil war.  While the population in the north was double what it was in the south there was still some 9 million people living in or around the area. Do you think naming some US bases after southern  generals could be more about offering an olive branch to the south and less about endorsing slavery?

And ya the swastika design predates the Nazi regime but go ahead and wear a t shirt with a Minaj on it. Some people are fickle like that.

 

[jollyjacktar]

Now here is a peaceful and creative way to deal with Neo-Nazis and any other Hard Left or Hard Right group:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8jJuJrJGDA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvjIYl_Nlao

Clever and more intelligent than antifa et al responses.

 

[Remius]

Between 650'000 and 850'000 US soldiers died in the civil war.  While the population in the north was double what it was in the south there was still some 9 million people living in or around the area. Do you think naming some US bases after southern  generals could be more about offering an olive branch to the south and less about endorsing slavery?

And ya the swastika design predates the Nazi regime but go ahead and wear a t shirt with a Minaj on it. Some people are fickle like that.

Yes to the first part.  But the statues being removed have nothing to do with appeasement.  They were put up white as a means of reminding the black population that the south does indeed remember in an era that sought to segregate and subjugate blacks.  50 years later in most cases.

You misunderstand how Swastika is bad example.  It was named well before.  It resisted name changes and no one seems to care much now.

 

[Rocky Mountains]

He was also a racist who supported slavery. the reason why the alt-right people are upset about the statues is that they focus on the "old history" that was taught about General Lee being the embodiment of all that is good and whole in the south.

Grant was also a slave owner and benefited immensely from his wife's and family's slaves.  Your criticism of Lee as a soldier is as meaningless as every other military armchair quarterback. 19 presidents owned slaves.  that's a lot of statues to knock down and a lot of history to rewrite.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States_who_owned_slaves

A lot of people were upset when ISIS and the Taliban destroyed ancient monuments but it is okay when Americans do it.  I don't perceive the difference.

 

[Rocky Mountains]

Yes to the first part.  But the statues being removed have nothing to do with appeasement.  They were put up white as a means of reminding the black population that the south does indeed remember in an era that sought to segregate and subjugate blacks.  50 years later in most cases.

I suspect statues to Lee were built because Southerners genuinely loved him.  The Confederacy were fighting for their freedom.  Slavery was one of the freedom issues although more important to the 6% of the population that owned slaves than to most.

 

[Jarnhamar]

RIP General Edmund Duke.

lol
I'll get back on topic but here's the Flag for the Terran Confederacy.

Any bets I can get a few thousand signatures protesting Starcraft for their covert racism and using video games to train racist soldiers with war simulators?  ;D

Grant was also a slave owner and benefited immensely from his wife's and family's slaves.  Your criticism of Lee as a soldier is as meaningless as every other military armchair quarterback. 19 presidents owned slaves.  that's a lot of statues to knock down and a lot of history to rewrite.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States_who_owned_slaves

A lot of people were upset when ISIS and the Taliban destroyed ancient monuments but it is okay when Americans do it.  I don't perceive the difference.

Well said.
US should tear down all statues of presidents who owned slaves eh?

 

[ModlrMike]

From the NY Post:

Fighting Nazis doesn’t make ‘antifa’ the good guys

Fighting Nazis is a good thing, but fighting Nazis doesn’t necessarily make you or your cause good. By my lights this is simply an obvious fact.

 

[FJAG]

CNN article on Antifa:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/18/us/unmasking-antifa-anti-fascists-hard-left/index.html

:cheers:

 

[Remius]

lol
I'll get back on topic but here's the Flag for the Terran Confederacy.

Any bets I can get a few thousand signatures protesting Starcraft for their covert racism and using video games to train racist soldiers with war simulators?  ;D


Well said.
US should tear down all statues of presidents who owned slaves eh?

Sorry but that line of thinking is in terms of absolutes.  What RM fails to mention about Grant is that his relationship with blacks was very different than Lee's.  He freed his only save despite being in financial straits and relentlessly went after the KKK as president. 

Lee is a myth.  Created by the very people who want to legitimize the civil war as struggle for freedom.  It was a struggle to maintain an oppressive culture and economy built and thriving on slavery.  The south was a slave society and not a society with slaves.  I realise that we should judge history with today's values but sorry to say, people knew slavery was bad at that time just as we do now.  OUr values don't differ that much in that regard even though we are separated by 150 years.

 

[Remius]

From the NY Post:

Fighting Nazis doesn’t make ‘antifa’ the good guys

Fighting Nazis is a good thing, but fighting Nazis doesn’t necessarily make you or your cause good. By my lights this is simply an obvious fact.

Good post and good point.

 

[George Wallace]

Sorry but that line of thinking is in terms of absolutes.  What RM fails to mention about Grant is that his relationship with blacks was very different than Lee's.  He freed his only save despite being in financial straits and relentlessly went after the KKK as president. 

Lee is a myth.  Created by the very people who want to legitimize the civil war as struggle for freedom.  It was a struggle to maintain an oppressive culture and economy built and thriving on slavery.  The south was a slave society and not a society with slaves.  I realise that we should judge history with today's values but sorry to say, people knew slavery was bad at that time just as we do now.  OUr values don't differ that much in that regard even though we are separated by 150 years.

So?  Lee freeing his slaves is not to be mentioned in this discussion?

 

[The Bread Guy]

Now here is a peaceful and creative way to deal with Neo-Nazis and any other Hard Left or Hard Right group:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8jJuJrJGDA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvjIYl_Nlao

Then why can't the Nazis Western Values Protectors do the same thing here, then?

Sure, but do they stop with taking down every confederate statue and renaming all US confederate inspired military bases?  Should they they dismantle the the Luxor in Las Vegas because its a giant pyramid and you better believe the pyramids represent slavery ...

There's precedent for cities changing their names because of associations with people they feel screwed over by, but individual communities' mileage will vary.

... The Confederacy were fighting for their freedom ...

Their freedom to keep people as property as a way to keep overhead costs down?  Certainly not the freedom of their slaves.  Or is that why

Grant was also a slave owner and benefited immensely from his wife's and family's slaves.  Your criticism of Lee as a soldier is as meaningless as every other military armchair quarterback. 19 presidents owned slaves.  that's a lot of statues to knock down and a lot of history to rewrite ...

Again, #MoreThanOneHistory -- Lee was a general who rebelled against the duly elected government of the U.S.  One man's "traitor" is another man's "hero" I guess - can we include that bit on his statues?

A lot of people were upset when ISIS and the Taliban destroyed ancient monuments but it is okay when Americans do it.  I don't perceive the difference.

The biggest difference is that in one case, a group is pulling down monuments because of their religious beliefs, and in the other case, people whose ancestors have been screwed over by a group are not happy with the glorification of those who screwed the ancestors over.  Care to answer the question in the attached, then?

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

Grant was also a slave owner and benefited immensely from his wife's and family's slaves.  Your criticism of Lee as a soldier is as meaningless as every other military armchair quarterback. 19 presidents owned slaves.  that's a lot of statues to knock down and a lot of history to rewrite.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States_who_owned_slaves

A lot of people were upset when ISIS and the Taliban destroyed ancient monuments but it is okay when Americans do it.  I don't perceive the difference.

What is your point? If you literally read my post before that one you would know that I advocate a more holistic approach to history. As for the armchair quarterback thing, sure, but I can back up my premises. can you?

 

[Remius]

So?  Lee freeing his slaves is not to be mentioned in this discussion?

You mean the slaves he was forced to free as per is father in law's will?  The clause that stated that they had to be emancipated as expediently as possible in a time not to exceed 5years and actually took the the full five years?  Mostly because his plantation was losing money as well?

Context indeed.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/18/the-difference-between-george-washington-and-robert-e-lee-trump-sedition-slavery-confederate-monuments/

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

So?  Lee freeing his slaves is not to be mentioned in this discussion?

Technically, Lee never owned slaves. He inherited them from his father in law, George Washington Parke Custis, where they worked on his father in laws three estates. When Curtis died in 1857, Lee didn't inherit the slaves, but was placed as the executor of Curtis' will. The will stipulated “… upon the legacies to my four granddaughters being paid, then I give freedom to my slaves, the said slaves to be emancipated by my executor in such manner as he deems expedient and proper, the said emancipation to be accomplished in not exceeding five years from the time of my decease.” The period for freeing said slaves was 5 years. So, Lee followed the instructions left to him effectively, but it can't be said that he "freed them" per se. Would he have freed them without it being mandatory? Perhaps, but no one will ever know.

For his part, the only document that shows that Grant owned a slave is a 1859 document he signed stating he agreed to emancipate his slave "william" who he had bought from his father in law.The slaves his wife, Julia, had were also given to them by her father in law, but the historical record indicates that she never "owned" them but rather were given them as assistance while her father maintained ownership. This meant that neither her nor Grant could free them. As with Lee, the discussion on whether Grant and his wife would have freed these slaves is impossible to validate either way- the only evidence is the fact that Grant had one change to emancipate a slave and did so.

This goes into the need for a holistic approach to history- anyone with a black and white view is almost, 100% of the time, wrong or uneducated about the matter. The world works in grey.

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

Whoops. Well that's certainly embarrassing, you're right. Touche. We should still tear it down because its cultural approciation though

As for the remainder is it really researching?  With the  omg Nazis! Paranoia you don't think that's something people may seriously suggest?

Strip General Lee of his citizenship. And rall neo-nazis and antifa terrorists. And khdar. (can I use the SJW word of the month; false equalvincy  jk)

I'm not for one traitor and against another my friend.  Renaming  US bases en mass is ridiclous and virtue signalling.  (Unless they let the internet rename the bases. Like basey mcbase face.).

My grandfather landed at Normandy and a great uncle (Russian resistance)  was murdered by Nazis. I don't care that a town in Ontario is named swastika.

I still dont understand your argument. Why would you have an issue with renaming bases named after Confederate rebel losers (they did lose after all) if they're just rebels that should have citizenship stripped? Wouldn't that be better? If there was a CFB Khadr would you just be like, "well, it's history so lets leave it"?

 

[Jarnhamar]

I still dont understand your argument. Why would you have an issue with renaming bases named after Confederate rebel losers (they did lose after all) if they're just rebels that should have citizenship stripped? Wouldn't that be better? If there was a CFB Khadr would you just be like, "well, it's history so lets leave it"?

You seem really determined with trying to fly Khdar around on a red herring.  But sure, it sounds like a great argument to have in 152 years when someone tries to rename a Canadian Forces base in Khdars honour.

So what will a renaming crusade of US bases accomplish? Do you think doing so will heal all the racial tensions in the US? Does it seem like a good start? Stop at bases or should the US delete any and all references to all things confederate?

 

[jollyjacktar]

If the folks on the anti slavery side of this argument really want to make a difference,  how's about they do something about slavery today?  Apparently there are more people enslaved today than at any other time before in history.  Instead of bitching about events over 150 years ago, do something constructive today, for people actually in peril.  Not long dead corpses... :2c: