robert e lee statue removed

[BackAgain]

I can’t say that I’m all worked up over the taking down of statues of the military leaders of the failed Confederacy.

Robert E. Lee was a highly accomplished and renowned military leader. He ended up fighting against his own nation, the United States of America. His side, the Southern Confederate States, lost the war. It is pretty rare to honor the defeated.

History won’t be rewritten just because some statues are getting melted down. However, if they try to alter the historical texts, that would be worth protesting. Beyond that, fuck Robert E. Lee. Fuck Jefferson Davis.

 

[Correll]

You yourself said you were celebrating your heritage. Well the Confederate flag represents slavery, many is not all of those statues that were erected were paid for by the KKK which represents hatred and bigotry. I don't think those are things of value in anyone's heritage.

Those that celebrate it, believe it represents something else.


You do admit that they believe it represents something else, right?

 

[Curried Goats]

Those that celebrate it, believe it represents something else.


You do admit that they believe it represents something else, right?

I admit that's what they claim. Who's is obliged to believe anyone's claims? If your wife is always showing up with black eyes do we need to believe you when you tell us you love her?

 

[Superbadbrutha]

You're still talking in an ambiguous nature, that is inconsistent in a discussion. You take one side or the other. There's no middle ground.

Has racism, hatred and discrimination been a part of this country since it was founded?

 

[bendog]

Robert E. Lee statue removed in Virginia

The largest remaining Confederate statue in the United States, depicting Civil War General Robert E. Lee, was taken down in Richmond, Virginia. The governor ordered its removal last year, but the effort was stalled until the Virginia Supreme Court decided to remove it last week.

www.nbcnews.com

the chopped it up ewe. blacks destroying history still.

Personally, I'm not really in favor of removing statutes simply because they were funded by the Daughters of the Confederacy for the purpose of creating a myth that the civil war was somehow justified as the Lost Cause or a noble effort. The South CAUSED and STARTED the civil war because it didn't want the Northern States to prevent slavery from expanding into newly created states. There was nothing noble about that, and DoC explicitly funded these statutes to support Jim Crow and make blacks second class citizens. Imo, the statues should just be contextualize as THAT. Of course this would be unacceptable to the DoC or white racists.

But the DoC and white racists are really the enemy of looking a positive of Southern heritage. The North's win in the civil war ended the Jackson democratic party, and the notion that govt should support the small agrarian family against the interests of the capital/bankers class.

 

[Mac-7]

Has racism, hatred and discrimination been a part of this country since it was founded?

Yes

Is that why you hate the greatest country on earth or long for your ancestral homeland?

 

[bendog]

Has racism, hatred and discrimination been a part of this country since it was founded?

Is this a trick question? LOL

I'm not quite sure what you mean by "hatred." Hatred is an emotion, and sin, going back longer than either the Torah or Homer. Racism and discrimination of course also predate the Founding, but both have a particular American application in our history.

 

[Stann]

I can’t say that I’m all worked up over the taking down of statues of the military leaders of the failed Confederacy.

Robert E. Lee was a highly accomplished and renowned military leader. He ended up fighting against his own nation, the United States of America. His side, the Southern Confederate States, lost the war. It is pretty rare to honor the defeated.

History won’t be rewritten just because some statues are getting melted down. However, if they try to alter the historical texts, that would be worth protesting. Beyond that, fuck Robert E. Lee. Fuck Jefferson Davis.

Correct.

 

[Stann]

Personally, I'm not really in favor of removing statutes simply because they were funded by the Daughters of the Confederacy for the purpose of creating a myth that the civil war was somehow justified as the Lost Cause or a noble effort. The South CAUSED and STARTED the civil war because it didn't want the Northern States to prevent slavery from expanding into newly created states. There was nothing noble about that, and DoC explicitly funded these statutes to support Jim Crow and make blacks second class citizens. Imo, the statues should just be contextualize as THAT. Of course this would be unacceptable to the DoC or white racists.

But the DoC and white racists are really the enemy of looking a positive of Southern heritage. The North's win in the civil war ended the Jackson democratic party, and the notion that govt should support the small agrarian family against the interests of the capital/bankers class.

How about removing them from public places because they are insult and a slight against every person of color. These things belong in a private Confederate museum, paid for by those who support such things. They shouldn't have been put up in the first place.

 

[bendog]

How about removing them from public places because they are insult and a slight against every person of color. These things belong in a private Confederate museum, paid for by those who support such things. They shouldn't have been put up in the first place.

Yeah, they are that. But it may be that "removing them" to the basement just encourages white supremacists's irrational beliefs of marginalization. I'm sorry if its offensive but offering a less qualified black college entrant benefits based on race does discriminate against an equally, or better, qualified white. That is what it is. If anyone wants to argue that that is somehow "justifiable" have at it. But when I look at white supremacists, I see sad people who need someone to blame for their shit. Rather than giving them some new perceived grievance, imo it'd be better to pull off the bandaid and see what's underneath.

There was something positive that was lost in the civil war. The Southern subsistence farmers had a lot in common with the guys they were fighting. Post-civil war the democratic party (except for the Bourbons and Grover Cleveland) that was pretty impotent and made up of small farmers in the South and western plains. We've lost that now, with the little red school house and democracy in direct representation on a local level.

Of course, blacks were denied that in the south, and it was the poor whites who were the Klans marching soldiers because they feared direct econ competition from the blacks. That was the whole point of having jim crow.

 

[Stann]

Yeah, they are that. But it may be that "removing them" to the basement just encourages white supremacists's irrational beliefs of marginalization. I'm sorry if its offensive but offering a less qualified black college entrant benefits based on race does discriminate against an equally, or better, qualified white. That is what it is. If anyone wants to argue that that is somehow "justifiable" have at it. But when I look at white supremacists, I see sad people who need someone to blame for their shit. Rather than giving them some new perceived grievance, imo it'd be better to pull off the bandaid and see what's underneath.

There was something positive that was lost in the civil war. The Southern subsistence farmers had a lot in common with the guys they were fighting. Post-civil war the democratic party (except for the Bourbons and Grover Cleveland) that was pretty impotent and made up of small farmers in the South and western plains. We've lost that now, with the little red school house and democracy in direct representation on a local level.

Of course, blacks were denied that in the south, and it was the poor whites who were the Klans marching soldiers because they feared direct econ competition from the blacks. That was the whole point of having jim crow.

You seem to be working with a lot of demons, there's a lot of ambiguity in what you say. Have a good day. I'm out of here.

 

[bendog]

You seem to be working with a lot of demons, there's a lot of ambiguity in what you say. Have a good day. I'm out of here.

Well, I don't find white supremacists totally without justifications, but you have a nice day too.

 

[Curried Goats]

Yeah, they are that. But it may be that "removing them" to the basement just encourages white supremacists's irrational beliefs of marginalization. I'm sorry if its offensive but offering a less qualified black college entrant benefits based on race does discriminate against an equally, or better, qualified white. That is what it is. If anyone wants to argue that that is somehow "justifiable" have at it. But when I look at white supremacists, I see sad people who need someone to blame for their shit. Rather than giving them some new perceived grievance, imo it'd be better to pull off the bandaid and see what's underneath.

Qualified is often a subjective distinction. You mean qualified based on criteria you find more important than others.

 

[bendog]

Qualified is often a subjective distinction. You mean qualified based on criteria you find more important than others.

Well yes. Giving a race or gender "extra" credit is subjective. That's my point. If one kid has a 3.5 and higher sat score than another kid, I won't say he would be irrationally miffed if a kid with lower scores got in on racial preference.

 

[Superbadbrutha]

Yes

Is that why you hate the greatest country on earth or long for your ancestral homeland?

Yep I hate it so much I served in the US Army, how about you? Did you serve the country you love so much?

 

[Curried Goats]

Well yes. Giving a race or gender "extra" credit is subjective. That's my point. If one kid has a 3.5 and higher sat score than another kid, I won't say he would be irrationally miffed if a kid with lower scores got in on racial preference.

And believing gpa's are determinative of aptitude is specious at best.

 

[bendog]

And believing gpa's are determinative of aptitude is specious at best.

Personally, I prefer Tex's approach to admissions to UT Austin that gives preferences to class rankings from individual districts.

 

[Curried Goats]

Personally, I prefer Tex's approach to admissions to UT Austin that gives preferences to class rankings from individual districts.

At least you're admitting now that your criteria are subjective.

 

[bendog]

At least you're admitting now that your criteria are subjective.

No not at all. Each college sets "objective" criteria. Each kid is judged by ranking under that criteria. No college or uni that I know of accepts kids simply randomly ... unless they're "for profit."

But there's no way to create any test like an SAT that is not biased. So colleges apply other criteria, like HS rank, community involvement, socio-econ factors, work, etc. I recall when my daughter was applying to comptetive private schools, one made a point to say a poor kid working at subway was going to get as many "points" as a kid with great extra curriculars. But giving extra points for race .... that's going to offend some other race. You'd be pissed off if Ole Miss gave extra points for being white. (they don't btw)

 

[Curried Goats]

No not at all. Each college sets "objective" criteria. Each kid is judged by ranking under that criteria. No college or uni that I know of accepts kids simply randomly ... unless they're "for profit."

But there's no way to create any test like an SAT that is not biased. So colleges apply other criteria, like HS rank, community involvement, socio-econ factors, work, etc. I recall when my daughter was applying to comptetive private schools, one made a point to say a poor kid working at subway was going to get as many "points" as a kid with great extra curriculars. But giving extra points for race .... that's going to offend some other race. You'd be pissed off if Ole Miss gave extra points for being white. (they don't btw)

Subjective does not equate to random.