Time to rename our Confederate Forts

[Polishprince]

Polishprince writes:
“Actually, the veterans from both sides of the Civil War reconciled after the conflict. Why can't modern liberals accept that?”

The reconciliation after the Civil War you praise, like the construction of statues of Confederate leaders, the flying of Confederate flags over courthouses throughout the South, the later naming of military bases after some despicable Confederate generals (Fort Benning, for example) — all the love and “reconciliation” of white Americans ... was in most ways carried out at the expense of African Americans.

The “Noble Lost Cause“ mythology was predicated on — and in large part consciously built in defense of — Jim Crow apartheid laws, Negro oppression, and white supremacy. Because of that the much desired “reconciliation” between North and South — not to mention black and white — never really could hold. That much ballyhooed “reconciliation,” based on white supremacy, started to come apart when the Civil Rights Movement ended legal white supremacy in our nation. Those who are unwilling even to address symbolic remnants of Jim Crow will never be able to address the profound remaining social and economic problems that divide our society in so many ways.

“Liberals” are not monolithic, and many like FDR and Wilson and even JFK bought into the “noble iconic” view of the “American hero” Robert E. Lee. But today other wise historical voices, voices like those of the great Frederick Douglass, remind us at whose expense that (ultimately shallow) reconciliation occurred.

So, do you think America should re-fight the Civil War until one side or the other annihilated ? Never treat each other with respect for all eternity?

 

[rightwinger]

CremeBrulee writes:
“That's the problem with this shit. Any name you might come up with will have some sort of stigma attached to it by someone. I guess you could start naming things after inanimate objects...”

I don’t think we will ever run out of genuine patriots and heroes who fought for worthy American (and universal) values. You are right, though, that we needn’t name forts after Generals only. Sure there may always be differences concerning this or that name, but at least let us not choose the names of men who fought against the United States in a war that defended slavery.

Or ideas even. Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. I am not up to date on naming conventions for the military. Once you go down the rabbit hole of changing names though, you should be prepared to change everything named after anything or anyone to suit the whims of how people feel about something at any given time or according to their political ideology.

I love the idea of Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. It would be hard to change these names once folks got used to them. Even the South during the Civil War claimed it was fighting for these ideals. Plus, maybe, hopefully, it would have a salutary subliminal influence on our military, and serve as a reminder of what we are supposed to be fighting for when we fight overseas.

This is meant as an insult to southern Americans, and it would be seen that way.
This is about insulting and marginalizing a group of people.
This is proof that Diversity and Multi-culturalism, as ideas and policy goals, were always lies.

Renaming Fort Benning — named after a diehard racist Confederate slaveholder (see comment #110) — calling it say “Fort Liberty“ — would be an “insult to Southern Americans...” ?

Not to any Americans (wherever they live) ... with their heads screwed on right!

SUre it would. It would be saying that Southern history and heritage is a shame that they bear, that they alone among all groups, are not allowed to celebrate their history.


That is an insult. YOur denial of that obvious fact is also offensive.

Slavery IS a shame they bear

Every nation has a time of slavery in its history. Englishmen were slave-owners, Turks were slave-owners, Berbers were slave-owners...
Can you accept this simple fact?

40 percent of the Confederacy was in bondage. Four million people.

No other nation ever embraced slavery to the degree the Confederacy did.

Really? What about medieval Baltic States where more than 85% of the total population were serfs who had less human rights than the slaves in the Confederacy?

Serfs were not property, they and their children were not bought and sold

The Slaves in Antiquity had it a lot harder than those in America during antebellum days. Picking cotton may not have been an idyllic life, but it was a lot better than rowing in a galley.

Charlton Heston?

Actually, Judah Ben-Hur. Heston was the actor that portrayed Mr. Ben-hur on the silver screen.

Ben-Hur was a fictional character

So what are you saying? That being a galley slave was an easy gig?

He is just disagreeing because liberals need to believe that America is the worst when it comes to slavery.


Any facts to the contrary, they dismiss, ignore, deny, deflect, whatever.


BLAME AMERICA FIRST. REASONS? BECAUSE!

Today’s Republicans still defend the era of slavery.

Some of them were good people.

Actually, the GOP has always been against Slavery, in fact that is why the party was founded.

Sadly, they were formed to oppose slavery

Today’s Republicans disgrace that memory and choose instead to celebrate the memory of the slaveholders

We won the battle against slavery.


YOu are real brave, showing up 5 generations after the fight is over, and wanting to pick on people for something their great great grand daddy, might have done.


By "real brave" I mean, a real prick.

Actually, the veterans from both sides of the Civil War reconciled after the conflict.

Why can't modern liberals accept that?

https://www.essentialcivilwarcurriculum.com/union-and-confederate-veterans.html

I've posted photo evidence of that many times. rightwinger knows it. He is just a filthy liar.


They can't accept it, because they hate America and want to tear US apart.

The war ended. Since they were rejoining the union, it was felt that punitive measures would not speed the process.

That does not mean you have to accept the repulsive nature of the Confederacy.

GEt to the point when being a dick to their descendants 5 generations removed, is a good thing.


Or admit that you are just a petty tyrant for the sole joy of letting your internal evil and hate out into the world.

Many of the people in the South aren't even descendants of rebel soldiers. My Southern nephews and nieces share an ancestry with me, from the backwaters of the Austro-Hungarian Empire traveling to America to pursue ground floor opportunities in the Coal Industry.

I know that. rightwinger knows that.


He doesn't care, because this has nothing to do with his whining about slavery.


This is about the modern anti-white racism of the Left. This is just the excuse of the day.

CremeBrulee writes:
“That's the problem with this shit. Any name you might come up with will have some sort of stigma attached to it by someone. I guess you could start naming things after inanimate objects...”

I don’t think we will ever run out of genuine patriots and heroes who fought for worthy American (and universal) values. You are right, though, that we needn’t name forts after Generals only. Sure there may always be differences concerning this or that name, but at least let us not choose the names of men who fought against the United States in a war that defended slavery.

Or ideas even. Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. I am not up to date on naming conventions for the military. Once you go down the rabbit hole of changing names though, you should be prepared to change everything named after anything or anyone to suit the whims of how people feel about something at any given time or according to their political ideology.

I love the idea of Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. It would be hard to change these names once folks got used to them. Even the South during the Civil War claimed it was fighting for these ideals. Plus, maybe, hopefully, it would have a salutary subliminal influence on our military, and serve as a reminder of what we are supposed to be fighting for when we fight overseas.

This is meant as an insult to southern Americans, and it would be seen that way.
This is about insulting and marginalizing a group of people.
This is proof that Diversity and Multi-culturalism, as ideas and policy goals, were always lies.

Renaming Fort Benning — named after a diehard racist Confederate slaveholder (see comment #110) — calling it say “Fort Liberty“ — would be an “insult to Southern Americans...” ?

Not to any Americans (wherever they live) ... with their heads screwed on right!

SUre it would. It would be saying that Southern history and heritage is a shame that they bear, that they alone among all groups, are not allowed to celebrate their history.


That is an insult. YOur denial of that obvious fact is also offensive.

Slavery IS a shame they bear

Every nation has a time of slavery in its history. Englishmen were slave-owners, Turks were slave-owners, Berbers were slave-owners...
Can you accept this simple fact?

40 percent of the Confederacy was in bondage. Four million people.

No other nation ever embraced slavery to the degree the Confederacy did.

Really? What about medieval Baltic States where more than 85% of the total population were serfs who had less human rights than the slaves in the Confederacy?

Serfs were not property, they and their children were not bought and sold

The Slaves in Antiquity had it a lot harder than those in America during antebellum days. Picking cotton may not have been an idyllic life, but it was a lot better than rowing in a galley.

Charlton Heston?

Actually, Judah Ben-Hur. Heston was the actor that portrayed Mr. Ben-hur on the silver screen.

Ben-Hur was a fictional character

So what are you saying? That being a galley slave was an easy gig?

He is just disagreeing because liberals need to believe that America is the worst when it comes to slavery.


Any facts to the contrary, they dismiss, ignore, deny, deflect, whatever.


BLAME AMERICA FIRST. REASONS? BECAUSE!

Today’s Republicans still defend the era of slavery.

Some of them were good people.

Actually, the GOP has always been against Slavery, in fact that is why the party was founded.

Sadly, they were formed to oppose slavery

Today’s Republicans disgrace that memory and choose instead to celebrate the memory of the slaveholders

We won the battle against slavery.


YOu are real brave, showing up 5 generations after the fight is over, and wanting to pick on people for something their great great grand daddy, might have done.


By "real brave" I mean, a real prick.

Actually, the veterans from both sides of the Civil War reconciled after the conflict.

Why can't modern liberals accept that?

https://www.essentialcivilwarcurriculum.com/union-and-confederate-veterans.html

Veterans also reconciled with Germany, Japan and Vietnam.

But we don’t have statues honoring Hitler, Tojo and Ho Chi Minh

None of those people were American citizens.
You need to let it go.

Those Generals are being honored for a time they renounced their citizenship and took up arms against a flag they had sworn to defend

I've said it before and I'll say it again. We have enough dividing us right now without digging up the ******* Civil War.

No reason not to do the right thing.

We need to respect those who were the victims of the Confederacy not those who were the abusers

 

[anynameyouwish]

I believe they are part of history. Whether we like it or not, it is part of our heritage. That would like like Germany renaming Auschwitz and the other Concentration camps. It is part of their history. We may not agree to what happened there. But nonetheless...

some people say that trump wants to rename them after famous russian generals!

 

[Desperado]

CremeBrulee writes:
“That's the problem with this shit. Any name you might come up with will have some sort of stigma attached to it by someone. I guess you could start naming things after inanimate objects...”

I don’t think we will ever run out of genuine patriots and heroes who fought for worthy American (and universal) values. You are right, though, that we needn’t name forts after Generals only. Sure there may always be differences concerning this or that name, but at least let us not choose the names of men who fought against the United States in a war that defended slavery.

Or ideas even. Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. I am not up to date on naming conventions for the military. Once you go down the rabbit hole of changing names though, you should be prepared to change everything named after anything or anyone to suit the whims of how people feel about something at any given time or according to their political ideology.

I love the idea of Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. It would be hard to change these names once folks got used to them. Even the South during the Civil War claimed it was fighting for these ideals. Plus, maybe, hopefully, it would have a salutary subliminal influence on our military, and serve as a reminder of what we are supposed to be fighting for when we fight overseas.

This is meant as an insult to southern Americans, and it would be seen that way.
This is about insulting and marginalizing a group of people.
This is proof that Diversity and Multi-culturalism, as ideas and policy goals, were always lies.

Renaming Fort Benning — named after a diehard racist Confederate slaveholder (see comment #110) — calling it say “Fort Liberty“ — would be an “insult to Southern Americans...” ?

Not to any Americans (wherever they live) ... with their heads screwed on right!

SUre it would. It would be saying that Southern history and heritage is a shame that they bear, that they alone among all groups, are not allowed to celebrate their history.


That is an insult. YOur denial of that obvious fact is also offensive.

Slavery IS a shame they bear

Every nation has a time of slavery in its history. Englishmen were slave-owners, Turks were slave-owners, Berbers were slave-owners...
Can you accept this simple fact?

40 percent of the Confederacy was in bondage. Four million people.

No other nation ever embraced slavery to the degree the Confederacy did.

Really? What about medieval Baltic States where more than 85% of the total population were serfs who had less human rights than the slaves in the Confederacy?

Serfs were not property, they and their children were not bought and sold

The Slaves in Antiquity had it a lot harder than those in America during antebellum days. Picking cotton may not have been an idyllic life, but it was a lot better than rowing in a galley.

Charlton Heston?

Actually, Judah Ben-Hur. Heston was the actor that portrayed Mr. Ben-hur on the silver screen.

Ben-Hur was a fictional character

So what are you saying? That being a galley slave was an easy gig?

He is just disagreeing because liberals need to believe that America is the worst when it comes to slavery.


Any facts to the contrary, they dismiss, ignore, deny, deflect, whatever.


BLAME AMERICA FIRST. REASONS? BECAUSE!

Today’s Republicans still defend the era of slavery.

Some of them were good people.

Actually, the GOP has always been against Slavery, in fact that is why the party was founded.

Sadly, they were formed to oppose slavery

Today’s Republicans disgrace that memory and choose instead to celebrate the memory of the slaveholders

We won the battle against slavery.


YOu are real brave, showing up 5 generations after the fight is over, and wanting to pick on people for something their great great grand daddy, might have done.


By "real brave" I mean, a real prick.

Actually, the veterans from both sides of the Civil War reconciled after the conflict.

Why can't modern liberals accept that?

https://www.essentialcivilwarcurriculum.com/union-and-confederate-veterans.html

Veterans also reconciled with Germany, Japan and Vietnam.

But we don’t have statues honoring Hitler, Tojo and Ho Chi Minh

None of those people were American citizens.
You need to let it go.

Those Generals are being honored for a time they renounced their citizenship and took up arms against a flag they had sworn to defend

Unlike today's generals who are more politician than soldier and would not even know how to used a rifle

 

[anynameyouwish]

CremeBrulee writes:
“That's the problem with this shit. Any name you might come up with will have some sort of stigma attached to it by someone. I guess you could start naming things after inanimate objects...”

I don’t think we will ever run out of genuine patriots and heroes who fought for worthy American (and universal) values. You are right, though, that we needn’t name forts after Generals only. Sure there may always be differences concerning this or that name, but at least let us not choose the names of men who fought against the United States in a war that defended slavery.

Or ideas even. Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. I am not up to date on naming conventions for the military. Once you go down the rabbit hole of changing names though, you should be prepared to change everything named after anything or anyone to suit the whims of how people feel about something at any given time or according to their political ideology.

I love the idea of Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. It would be hard to change these names once folks got used to them. Even the South during the Civil War claimed it was fighting for these ideals. Plus, maybe, hopefully, it would have a salutary subliminal influence on our military, and serve as a reminder of what we are supposed to be fighting for when we fight overseas.

This is meant as an insult to southern Americans, and it would be seen that way.
This is about insulting and marginalizing a group of people.
This is proof that Diversity and Multi-culturalism, as ideas and policy goals, were always lies.

Renaming Fort Benning — named after a diehard racist Confederate slaveholder (see comment #110) — calling it say “Fort Liberty“ — would be an “insult to Southern Americans...” ?

Not to any Americans (wherever they live) ... with their heads screwed on right!

SUre it would. It would be saying that Southern history and heritage is a shame that they bear, that they alone among all groups, are not allowed to celebrate their history.


That is an insult. YOur denial of that obvious fact is also offensive.

Slavery IS a shame they bear

Every nation has a time of slavery in its history. Englishmen were slave-owners, Turks were slave-owners, Berbers were slave-owners...
Can you accept this simple fact?

40 percent of the Confederacy was in bondage. Four million people.

No other nation ever embraced slavery to the degree the Confederacy did.

Really? What about medieval Baltic States where more than 85% of the total population were serfs who had less human rights than the slaves in the Confederacy?

Serfs were not property, they and their children were not bought and sold

The Slaves in Antiquity had it a lot harder than those in America during antebellum days. Picking cotton may not have been an idyllic life, but it was a lot better than rowing in a galley.

Charlton Heston?

Actually, Judah Ben-Hur. Heston was the actor that portrayed Mr. Ben-hur on the silver screen.

Ben-Hur was a fictional character

So what are you saying? That being a galley slave was an easy gig?

He is just disagreeing because liberals need to believe that America is the worst when it comes to slavery.


Any facts to the contrary, they dismiss, ignore, deny, deflect, whatever.


BLAME AMERICA FIRST. REASONS? BECAUSE!

Today’s Republicans still defend the era of slavery.

Some of them were good people.

Actually, the GOP has always been against Slavery, in fact that is why the party was founded.

Sadly, they were formed to oppose slavery

Today’s Republicans disgrace that memory and choose instead to celebrate the memory of the slaveholders

We won the battle against slavery.


YOu are real brave, showing up 5 generations after the fight is over, and wanting to pick on people for something their great great grand daddy, might have done.


By "real brave" I mean, a real prick.

Actually, the veterans from both sides of the Civil War reconciled after the conflict.

Why can't modern liberals accept that?

https://www.essentialcivilwarcurriculum.com/union-and-confederate-veterans.html

Veterans also reconciled with Germany, Japan and Vietnam.

But we don’t have statues honoring Hitler, Tojo and Ho Chi Minh

None of those people were American citizens.
You need to let it go.

Those Generals are being honored for a time they renounced their citizenship and took up arms against a flag they had sworn to defend

Unlike today's generals who are more politician than soldier and would not even know how to used a rifle

another conservative spitting on our military!

another conservative who HATES the military!

 

[rightwinger]

CremeBrulee writes:
“That's the problem with this shit. Any name you might come up with will have some sort of stigma attached to it by someone. I guess you could start naming things after inanimate objects...”

I don’t think we will ever run out of genuine patriots and heroes who fought for worthy American (and universal) values. You are right, though, that we needn’t name forts after Generals only. Sure there may always be differences concerning this or that name, but at least let us not choose the names of men who fought against the United States in a war that defended slavery.

Or ideas even. Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. I am not up to date on naming conventions for the military. Once you go down the rabbit hole of changing names though, you should be prepared to change everything named after anything or anyone to suit the whims of how people feel about something at any given time or according to their political ideology.

I love the idea of Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. It would be hard to change these names once folks got used to them. Even the South during the Civil War claimed it was fighting for these ideals. Plus, maybe, hopefully, it would have a salutary subliminal influence on our military, and serve as a reminder of what we are supposed to be fighting for when we fight overseas.

This is meant as an insult to southern Americans, and it would be seen that way.
This is about insulting and marginalizing a group of people.
This is proof that Diversity and Multi-culturalism, as ideas and policy goals, were always lies.

Renaming Fort Benning — named after a diehard racist Confederate slaveholder (see comment #110) — calling it say “Fort Liberty“ — would be an “insult to Southern Americans...” ?

Not to any Americans (wherever they live) ... with their heads screwed on right!

SUre it would. It would be saying that Southern history and heritage is a shame that they bear, that they alone among all groups, are not allowed to celebrate their history.


That is an insult. YOur denial of that obvious fact is also offensive.

Slavery IS a shame they bear

Every nation has a time of slavery in its history. Englishmen were slave-owners, Turks were slave-owners, Berbers were slave-owners...
Can you accept this simple fact?

40 percent of the Confederacy was in bondage. Four million people.

No other nation ever embraced slavery to the degree the Confederacy did.

Really? What about medieval Baltic States where more than 85% of the total population were serfs who had less human rights than the slaves in the Confederacy?

Serfs were not property, they and their children were not bought and sold

The Slaves in Antiquity had it a lot harder than those in America during antebellum days. Picking cotton may not have been an idyllic life, but it was a lot better than rowing in a galley.

Charlton Heston?

Actually, Judah Ben-Hur. Heston was the actor that portrayed Mr. Ben-hur on the silver screen.

Ben-Hur was a fictional character

So what are you saying? That being a galley slave was an easy gig?

He is just disagreeing because liberals need to believe that America is the worst when it comes to slavery.


Any facts to the contrary, they dismiss, ignore, deny, deflect, whatever.


BLAME AMERICA FIRST. REASONS? BECAUSE!

Today’s Republicans still defend the era of slavery.

Some of them were good people.

Actually, the GOP has always been against Slavery, in fact that is why the party was founded.

Sadly, they were formed to oppose slavery

Today’s Republicans disgrace that memory and choose instead to celebrate the memory of the slaveholders

We won the battle against slavery.


YOu are real brave, showing up 5 generations after the fight is over, and wanting to pick on people for something their great great grand daddy, might have done.


By "real brave" I mean, a real prick.

Actually, the veterans from both sides of the Civil War reconciled after the conflict.

Why can't modern liberals accept that?

https://www.essentialcivilwarcurriculum.com/union-and-confederate-veterans.html

Veterans also reconciled with Germany, Japan and Vietnam.

But we don’t have statues honoring Hitler, Tojo and Ho Chi Minh

None of those people were American citizens.
You need to let it go.

Those Generals are being honored for a time they renounced their citizenship and took up arms against a flag they had sworn to defend

Unlike today's generals who are more politician than soldier and would not even know how to used a rifle

Gen Washington was a politician

 

[anynameyouwish]

CremeBrulee writes:
“That's the problem with this shit. Any name you might come up with will have some sort of stigma attached to it by someone. I guess you could start naming things after inanimate objects...”

I don’t think we will ever run out of genuine patriots and heroes who fought for worthy American (and universal) values. You are right, though, that we needn’t name forts after Generals only. Sure there may always be differences concerning this or that name, but at least let us not choose the names of men who fought against the United States in a war that defended slavery.

Or ideas even. Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. I am not up to date on naming conventions for the military. Once you go down the rabbit hole of changing names though, you should be prepared to change everything named after anything or anyone to suit the whims of how people feel about something at any given time or according to their political ideology.

I love the idea of Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. It would be hard to change these names once folks got used to them. Even the South during the Civil War claimed it was fighting for these ideals. Plus, maybe, hopefully, it would have a salutary subliminal influence on our military, and serve as a reminder of what we are supposed to be fighting for when we fight overseas.

This is meant as an insult to southern Americans, and it would be seen that way.
This is about insulting and marginalizing a group of people.
This is proof that Diversity and Multi-culturalism, as ideas and policy goals, were always lies.

Renaming Fort Benning — named after a diehard racist Confederate slaveholder (see comment #110) — calling it say “Fort Liberty“ — would be an “insult to Southern Americans...” ?

Not to any Americans (wherever they live) ... with their heads screwed on right!

SUre it would. It would be saying that Southern history and heritage is a shame that they bear, that they alone among all groups, are not allowed to celebrate their history.


That is an insult. YOur denial of that obvious fact is also offensive.

Slavery IS a shame they bear

Every nation has a time of slavery in its history. Englishmen were slave-owners, Turks were slave-owners, Berbers were slave-owners...
Can you accept this simple fact?

40 percent of the Confederacy was in bondage. Four million people.

No other nation ever embraced slavery to the degree the Confederacy did.

Really? What about medieval Baltic States where more than 85% of the total population were serfs who had less human rights than the slaves in the Confederacy?

Serfs were not property, they and their children were not bought and sold

The Slaves in Antiquity had it a lot harder than those in America during antebellum days. Picking cotton may not have been an idyllic life, but it was a lot better than rowing in a galley.

Charlton Heston?

Actually, Judah Ben-Hur. Heston was the actor that portrayed Mr. Ben-hur on the silver screen.

Ben-Hur was a fictional character

So what are you saying? That being a galley slave was an easy gig?

He is just disagreeing because liberals need to believe that America is the worst when it comes to slavery.


Any facts to the contrary, they dismiss, ignore, deny, deflect, whatever.


BLAME AMERICA FIRST. REASONS? BECAUSE!

Today’s Republicans still defend the era of slavery.

Some of them were good people.

Actually, the GOP has always been against Slavery, in fact that is why the party was founded.

Sadly, they were formed to oppose slavery

Today’s Republicans disgrace that memory and choose instead to celebrate the memory of the slaveholders

We won the battle against slavery.


YOu are real brave, showing up 5 generations after the fight is over, and wanting to pick on people for something their great great grand daddy, might have done.


By "real brave" I mean, a real prick.

Actually, the veterans from both sides of the Civil War reconciled after the conflict.

Why can't modern liberals accept that?

https://www.essentialcivilwarcurriculum.com/union-and-confederate-veterans.html

Veterans also reconciled with Germany, Japan and Vietnam.

But we don’t have statues honoring Hitler, Tojo and Ho Chi Minh

None of those people were American citizens.
You need to let it go.

Those Generals are being honored for a time they renounced their citizenship and took up arms against a flag they had sworn to defend

Unlike today's generals who are more politician than soldier and would not even know how to used a rifle

Gen Washington was a politician

who owned SLAVES!

 

[Desperado]

CremeBrulee writes:
“That's the problem with this shit. Any name you might come up with will have some sort of stigma attached to it by someone. I guess you could start naming things after inanimate objects...”

I don’t think we will ever run out of genuine patriots and heroes who fought for worthy American (and universal) values. You are right, though, that we needn’t name forts after Generals only. Sure there may always be differences concerning this or that name, but at least let us not choose the names of men who fought against the United States in a war that defended slavery.

Or ideas even. Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. I am not up to date on naming conventions for the military. Once you go down the rabbit hole of changing names though, you should be prepared to change everything named after anything or anyone to suit the whims of how people feel about something at any given time or according to their political ideology.

I love the idea of Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. It would be hard to change these names once folks got used to them. Even the South during the Civil War claimed it was fighting for these ideals. Plus, maybe, hopefully, it would have a salutary subliminal influence on our military, and serve as a reminder of what we are supposed to be fighting for when we fight overseas.

This is meant as an insult to southern Americans, and it would be seen that way.
This is about insulting and marginalizing a group of people.
This is proof that Diversity and Multi-culturalism, as ideas and policy goals, were always lies.

Renaming Fort Benning — named after a diehard racist Confederate slaveholder (see comment #110) — calling it say “Fort Liberty“ — would be an “insult to Southern Americans...” ?

Not to any Americans (wherever they live) ... with their heads screwed on right!

SUre it would. It would be saying that Southern history and heritage is a shame that they bear, that they alone among all groups, are not allowed to celebrate their history.


That is an insult. YOur denial of that obvious fact is also offensive.

Slavery IS a shame they bear

Every nation has a time of slavery in its history. Englishmen were slave-owners, Turks were slave-owners, Berbers were slave-owners...
Can you accept this simple fact?

40 percent of the Confederacy was in bondage. Four million people.

No other nation ever embraced slavery to the degree the Confederacy did.

Really? What about medieval Baltic States where more than 85% of the total population were serfs who had less human rights than the slaves in the Confederacy?

Serfs were not property, they and their children were not bought and sold

The Slaves in Antiquity had it a lot harder than those in America during antebellum days. Picking cotton may not have been an idyllic life, but it was a lot better than rowing in a galley.

Charlton Heston?

Actually, Judah Ben-Hur. Heston was the actor that portrayed Mr. Ben-hur on the silver screen.

Ben-Hur was a fictional character

So what are you saying? That being a galley slave was an easy gig?

He is just disagreeing because liberals need to believe that America is the worst when it comes to slavery.


Any facts to the contrary, they dismiss, ignore, deny, deflect, whatever.


BLAME AMERICA FIRST. REASONS? BECAUSE!

Today’s Republicans still defend the era of slavery.

Some of them were good people.

Actually, the GOP has always been against Slavery, in fact that is why the party was founded.

Sadly, they were formed to oppose slavery

Today’s Republicans disgrace that memory and choose instead to celebrate the memory of the slaveholders

We won the battle against slavery.


YOu are real brave, showing up 5 generations after the fight is over, and wanting to pick on people for something their great great grand daddy, might have done.


By "real brave" I mean, a real prick.

Actually, the veterans from both sides of the Civil War reconciled after the conflict.

Why can't modern liberals accept that?

https://www.essentialcivilwarcurriculum.com/union-and-confederate-veterans.html

Veterans also reconciled with Germany, Japan and Vietnam.

But we don’t have statues honoring Hitler, Tojo and Ho Chi Minh

None of those people were American citizens.
You need to let it go.

Those Generals are being honored for a time they renounced their citizenship and took up arms against a flag they had sworn to defend

Unlike today's generals who are more politician than soldier and would not even know how to used a rifle

Gen Washington was a politician

who owned SLAVES!

Well it looks like Blacks also owned slaves

Did Black People Own Slaves? | The Root

For those who are wondering about the retro title of this black history series, please take a moment to learn about historian Joel A. Rogers

www.theroot.com

At the peak of black slavery in the South, only 6 percent of Southern whites owned slaves. If you include the white people in the North, it means that only 1.4 percent of white Americans owned black slaves at the HEIGHT of slavery.

 

[rightwinger]

Our President has never had any trouble with renaming things......as long as they get renamed TRUMP

 

[rightwinger]

CremeBrulee writes:
“That's the problem with this shit. Any name you might come up with will have some sort of stigma attached to it by someone. I guess you could start naming things after inanimate objects...”

I don’t think we will ever run out of genuine patriots and heroes who fought for worthy American (and universal) values. You are right, though, that we needn’t name forts after Generals only. Sure there may always be differences concerning this or that name, but at least let us not choose the names of men who fought against the United States in a war that defended slavery.

Or ideas even. Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. I am not up to date on naming conventions for the military. Once you go down the rabbit hole of changing names though, you should be prepared to change everything named after anything or anyone to suit the whims of how people feel about something at any given time or according to their political ideology.

I love the idea of Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. It would be hard to change these names once folks got used to them. Even the South during the Civil War claimed it was fighting for these ideals. Plus, maybe, hopefully, it would have a salutary subliminal influence on our military, and serve as a reminder of what we are supposed to be fighting for when we fight overseas.

This is meant as an insult to southern Americans, and it would be seen that way.
This is about insulting and marginalizing a group of people.
This is proof that Diversity and Multi-culturalism, as ideas and policy goals, were always lies.

Renaming Fort Benning — named after a diehard racist Confederate slaveholder (see comment #110) — calling it say “Fort Liberty“ — would be an “insult to Southern Americans...” ?

Not to any Americans (wherever they live) ... with their heads screwed on right!

SUre it would. It would be saying that Southern history and heritage is a shame that they bear, that they alone among all groups, are not allowed to celebrate their history.


That is an insult. YOur denial of that obvious fact is also offensive.

Slavery IS a shame they bear

Every nation has a time of slavery in its history. Englishmen were slave-owners, Turks were slave-owners, Berbers were slave-owners...
Can you accept this simple fact?

40 percent of the Confederacy was in bondage. Four million people.

No other nation ever embraced slavery to the degree the Confederacy did.

Really? What about medieval Baltic States where more than 85% of the total population were serfs who had less human rights than the slaves in the Confederacy?

Serfs were not property, they and their children were not bought and sold

The Slaves in Antiquity had it a lot harder than those in America during antebellum days. Picking cotton may not have been an idyllic life, but it was a lot better than rowing in a galley.

Charlton Heston?

Actually, Judah Ben-Hur. Heston was the actor that portrayed Mr. Ben-hur on the silver screen.

Ben-Hur was a fictional character

So what are you saying? That being a galley slave was an easy gig?

He is just disagreeing because liberals need to believe that America is the worst when it comes to slavery.


Any facts to the contrary, they dismiss, ignore, deny, deflect, whatever.


BLAME AMERICA FIRST. REASONS? BECAUSE!

Today’s Republicans still defend the era of slavery.

Some of them were good people.

Actually, the GOP has always been against Slavery, in fact that is why the party was founded.

Sadly, they were formed to oppose slavery

Today’s Republicans disgrace that memory and choose instead to celebrate the memory of the slaveholders

We won the battle against slavery.


YOu are real brave, showing up 5 generations after the fight is over, and wanting to pick on people for something their great great grand daddy, might have done.


By "real brave" I mean, a real prick.

Actually, the veterans from both sides of the Civil War reconciled after the conflict.

Why can't modern liberals accept that?

https://www.essentialcivilwarcurriculum.com/union-and-confederate-veterans.html

Veterans also reconciled with Germany, Japan and Vietnam.

But we don’t have statues honoring Hitler, Tojo and Ho Chi Minh

None of those people were American citizens.
You need to let it go.

Those Generals are being honored for a time they renounced their citizenship and took up arms against a flag they had sworn to defend

Unlike today's generals who are more politician than soldier and would not even know how to used a rifle

Gen Washington was a politician

who owned SLAVES!

Well it looks like Blacks also owned slaves

Did Black People Own Slaves? | The Root

For those who are wondering about the retro title of this black history series, please take a moment to learn about historian Joel A. Rogers

www.theroot.com

At the peak of black slavery in the South, only 6 percent of Southern whites owned slaves. If you include the white people in the North, it means that only 1.4 percent of white Americans owned black slaves at the HEIGHT of slavery.

40 percent of the South was slave.

The economy of the South was built around the uncompensated labor of slaves. Even if you did not personally own a slave, you were still benefitting from the revenue they generated.

 

[anynameyouwish]

CremeBrulee writes:
“That's the problem with this shit. Any name you might come up with will have some sort of stigma attached to it by someone. I guess you could start naming things after inanimate objects...”

I don’t think we will ever run out of genuine patriots and heroes who fought for worthy American (and universal) values. You are right, though, that we needn’t name forts after Generals only. Sure there may always be differences concerning this or that name, but at least let us not choose the names of men who fought against the United States in a war that defended slavery.

Or ideas even. Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. I am not up to date on naming conventions for the military. Once you go down the rabbit hole of changing names though, you should be prepared to change everything named after anything or anyone to suit the whims of how people feel about something at any given time or according to their political ideology.

I love the idea of Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. It would be hard to change these names once folks got used to them. Even the South during the Civil War claimed it was fighting for these ideals. Plus, maybe, hopefully, it would have a salutary subliminal influence on our military, and serve as a reminder of what we are supposed to be fighting for when we fight overseas.

This is meant as an insult to southern Americans, and it would be seen that way.
This is about insulting and marginalizing a group of people.
This is proof that Diversity and Multi-culturalism, as ideas and policy goals, were always lies.

Renaming Fort Benning — named after a diehard racist Confederate slaveholder (see comment #110) — calling it say “Fort Liberty“ — would be an “insult to Southern Americans...” ?

Not to any Americans (wherever they live) ... with their heads screwed on right!

SUre it would. It would be saying that Southern history and heritage is a shame that they bear, that they alone among all groups, are not allowed to celebrate their history.


That is an insult. YOur denial of that obvious fact is also offensive.

Slavery IS a shame they bear

Every nation has a time of slavery in its history. Englishmen were slave-owners, Turks were slave-owners, Berbers were slave-owners...
Can you accept this simple fact?

40 percent of the Confederacy was in bondage. Four million people.

No other nation ever embraced slavery to the degree the Confederacy did.

Really? What about medieval Baltic States where more than 85% of the total population were serfs who had less human rights than the slaves in the Confederacy?

Serfs were not property, they and their children were not bought and sold

The Slaves in Antiquity had it a lot harder than those in America during antebellum days. Picking cotton may not have been an idyllic life, but it was a lot better than rowing in a galley.

Charlton Heston?

Actually, Judah Ben-Hur. Heston was the actor that portrayed Mr. Ben-hur on the silver screen.

Ben-Hur was a fictional character

So what are you saying? That being a galley slave was an easy gig?

He is just disagreeing because liberals need to believe that America is the worst when it comes to slavery.


Any facts to the contrary, they dismiss, ignore, deny, deflect, whatever.


BLAME AMERICA FIRST. REASONS? BECAUSE!

Today’s Republicans still defend the era of slavery.

Some of them were good people.

Actually, the GOP has always been against Slavery, in fact that is why the party was founded.

Sadly, they were formed to oppose slavery

Today’s Republicans disgrace that memory and choose instead to celebrate the memory of the slaveholders

We won the battle against slavery.


YOu are real brave, showing up 5 generations after the fight is over, and wanting to pick on people for something their great great grand daddy, might have done.


By "real brave" I mean, a real prick.

Actually, the veterans from both sides of the Civil War reconciled after the conflict.

Why can't modern liberals accept that?

https://www.essentialcivilwarcurriculum.com/union-and-confederate-veterans.html

Veterans also reconciled with Germany, Japan and Vietnam.

But we don’t have statues honoring Hitler, Tojo and Ho Chi Minh

None of those people were American citizens.
You need to let it go.

Those Generals are being honored for a time they renounced their citizenship and took up arms against a flag they had sworn to defend

Unlike today's generals who are more politician than soldier and would not even know how to used a rifle

Gen Washington was a politician

who owned SLAVES!

Well it looks like Blacks also owned slaves

Did Black People Own Slaves? | The Root

For those who are wondering about the retro title of this black history series, please take a moment to learn about historian Joel A. Rogers

www.theroot.com

At the peak of black slavery in the South, only 6 percent of Southern whites owned slaves. If you include the white people in the North, it means that only 1.4 percent of white Americans owned black slaves at the HEIGHT of slavery.

40 percent of the South was slave.

The economy of the South was built around the uncompensated labor of slaves. Even if you did not personally own a slave, you were still benefitting from the revenue they generated.

a rather EXTREME form of SOCIALISM!

imagine....conservative christians BUYING people and FORCING them to do all the work while they drank mint juleps!

 

[CremeBrulee]

The economy of the South was built around the uncompensated labor of slaves. Even if you did not personally own a slave, you were still benefitting from the revenue they generated.

Soo many contradicting lefty theories. One minute I am being told the reason folks can't ahead today is because the evil rich people have all the wealth and won't share and in the next I'm told all white people benefited and still do from the largess of slave holders because they had so much wealth. Which is it?

 

[Silver Cat]

The economy of the South was built around the uncompensated labor of slaves.

Actually, most of slaves were traded into the slavery by their Black Brothers in Africa and were captured in local wars and raids. Their labour was compensated - it is much better to be sold into America, than be simply eaten in Africa.

 

[Silver Cat]

And yes, don't forget, that it was Obama, who really resumed slave-trading in Libya.

 

[rightwinger]

The economy of the South was built around the uncompensated labor of slaves. Even if you did not personally own a slave, you were still benefitting from the revenue they generated.

Soo many contradicting lefty theories. One minute I am being told the reason folks can't ahead today is because the evil rich people have all the wealth and won't share and in the next I'm told all white people benefited and still do from the largess of slave holders because they had so much wealth. Which is it?

You don’t understand how economies work do you?
80 percent of the south’s economy was dependent on cotton and tobacco. Both relied on slave labor.
Even if you didn’t own slaves you would hire them from a nearby plantation to harvest crops.
Otherwise you engaged in businesses that provided support to the plantation.

 

[rightwinger]

The economy of the South was built around the uncompensated labor of slaves.

Actually, most of slaves were traded into the slavery by their Black Brothers in Africa and were captured in local wars and raids. Their labour was compensated - it is much better to be sold into America, than be simply eaten in Africa.

None were
We ended the importation of slaves in 1810. All the Confederate slaves were bred here. And yes I mean bred

 

[Silver Cat]

The economy of the South was built around the uncompensated labor of slaves.

Actually, most of slaves were traded into the slavery by their Black Brothers in Africa and were captured in local wars and raids. Their labour was compensated - it is much better to be sold into America, than be simply eaten in Africa.

None were
We ended the importation of slaves in 1810. All the Confederate slaves were bred here. And yes I mean bred

First, we ended only the legal importation. The illegal importation through Spanish Florida was rather active. And yes, the cargo of prized smuggler ships usually was confiscated by the state authorities and sold at the auctions.
Second, as far as I know, near 75% of "blacks" were described as "mixed-race", so they had been working for their biological fathers.

I'm pretty sure, that there are more descendants of slave-owners between BLM-activists than between ordinary whites.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

We need to ask......What have these men done to deserve such an honor?

AP HIll, Braxton Bragg, George Pickett, John Bell Hood......why should they be honored?

You forgot Mario Cuomo

 

[22lcidw]

CremeBrulee writes:
“That's the problem with this shit. Any name you might come up with will have some sort of stigma attached to it by someone. I guess you could start naming things after inanimate objects...”

I don’t think we will ever run out of genuine patriots and heroes who fought for worthy American (and universal) values. You are right, though, that we needn’t name forts after Generals only. Sure there may always be differences concerning this or that name, but at least let us not choose the names of men who fought against the United States in a war that defended slavery.

Or ideas even. Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. I am not up to date on naming conventions for the military. Once you go down the rabbit hole of changing names though, you should be prepared to change everything named after anything or anyone to suit the whims of how people feel about something at any given time or according to their political ideology.

I love the idea of Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. It would be hard to change these names once folks got used to them. Even the South during the Civil War claimed it was fighting for these ideals. Plus, maybe, hopefully, it would have a salutary subliminal influence on our military, and serve as a reminder of what we are supposed to be fighting for when we fight overseas.

This is meant as an insult to southern Americans, and it would be seen that way.
This is about insulting and marginalizing a group of people.
This is proof that Diversity and Multi-culturalism, as ideas and policy goals, were always lies.

Renaming Fort Benning — named after a diehard racist Confederate slaveholder (see comment #110) — calling it say “Fort Liberty“ — would be an “insult to Southern Americans...” ?

Not to any Americans (wherever they live) ... with their heads screwed on right!

SUre it would. It would be saying that Southern history and heritage is a shame that they bear, that they alone among all groups, are not allowed to celebrate their history.


That is an insult. YOur denial of that obvious fact is also offensive.

Slavery IS a shame they bear

Every nation has a time of slavery in its history. Englishmen were slave-owners, Turks were slave-owners, Berbers were slave-owners...
Can you accept this simple fact?

40 percent of the Confederacy was in bondage. Four million people.

No other nation ever embraced slavery to the degree the Confederacy did.

Really? What about medieval Baltic States where more than 85% of the total population were serfs who had less human rights than the slaves in the Confederacy?

Serfs were not property, they and their children were not bought and sold

The Slaves in Antiquity had it a lot harder than those in America during antebellum days. Picking cotton may not have been an idyllic life, but it was a lot better than rowing in a galley.

Charlton Heston?

Actually, Judah Ben-Hur. Heston was the actor that portrayed Mr. Ben-hur on the silver screen.

Ben-Hur was a fictional character

So what are you saying? That being a galley slave was an easy gig?

He is just disagreeing because liberals need to believe that America is the worst when it comes to slavery.


Any facts to the contrary, they dismiss, ignore, deny, deflect, whatever.


BLAME AMERICA FIRST. REASONS? BECAUSE!

Today’s Republicans still defend the era of slavery.

Some of them were good people.

Actually, the GOP has always been against Slavery, in fact that is why the party was founded.

Sadly, they were formed to oppose slavery

Today’s Republicans disgrace that memory and choose instead to celebrate the memory of the slaveholders

We won the battle against slavery.


YOu are real brave, showing up 5 generations after the fight is over, and wanting to pick on people for something their great great grand daddy, might have done.


By "real brave" I mean, a real prick.

Actually, the veterans from both sides of the Civil War reconciled after the conflict.

Why can't modern liberals accept that?

https://www.essentialcivilwarcurriculum.com/union-and-confederate-veterans.html

Veterans also reconciled with Germany, Japan and Vietnam.

But we don’t have statues honoring Hitler, Tojo and Ho Chi Minh

None of those people were American citizens.
You need to let it go.

Those Generals are being honored for a time they renounced their citizenship and took up arms against a flag they had sworn to defend

Unlike today's generals who are more politician than soldier and would not even know how to used a rifle

another conservative spitting on our military!

another conservative who HATES the military!

The Navy name a ship after a gay guy who was a pedophile.

 

[rightwinger]

Second, as far as I know, near 75% of "blacks" were described as "mixed-race", so they had been working for their biological fathers.

That is why they were known as Slave Rapers

Not something to be proud of. Raping a slave and then using your own son or daughter as a slave
Reprehensible