Restricted Is there an organized effort to get rid of Confederate symbols?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Rob9641

Captain
Annual Winner
Joined
Jun 7, 2010
Location
Maryland
It would appear that this country’s educational system and media
has devolved to the point that the only way to assure the correct dissemination of “facts” is to control those institutions. It is time to rise up against the forces of political correctness and indoctrination, let our watchword be – our facts are the only true facts. :help:

Eeek.
 

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Honored Fallen Comrade
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Location
Laurinburg NC
It would appear that this country’s educational system and media has devolved to the point that the only way to assure the correct dissemination of “facts” is to control those institutions. It is time to rise up against the forces of political correctness and indoctrination, let our watchword be – our facts are the only true facts

Good luck with that! I suspect that the vast majority of the population trusts 150 years of academic review on this subject.


Unfortunately for the public they getting closer to a 40 to 50 review of the subject, much of academic review prior to this time has been down played or dismissed outright.

"The first step in liquidating a people is to erase its memory. Destroy its books, its culture, its history. Then have somebody write new books, manufacture a new culture, invent a new history. Before long the nation will begin to forget what it is and what it was."

Milan Kundera
 

James B White

Captain
Honored Fallen Comrade
Joined
Dec 4, 2011
I keep seeing that the importance of slavery to the north and northern racism are some of the topics that posters say aren't emphasized enough. There's also the ongoing claim that peer review and academic historians are stifling the dissemination of information.

So I was amused at two emails I got this morning, from an academic email list I'm on:

George Van Cleve has written a very important new book. Building on the
recent work of historians like Robin Einhorn, David Waldstreicher, Mark
Graber, Leonard Richards, Paul Finkelman, and many others, Van Cleve
argues that the American Revolution and the founding of the United
States reinforced the power of slavery. Slavery was not tested by
Revolutionary ideology to the extent that other scholars have claimed;
northern emancipation was deeply compromised by racism,... etc etc

Then there was another book announcement:

This book presents images, documentation, and reflections from participants and spectators from a major public commemoration of Rhode Island's involvement with slavery and the slave trade.

Now admittedly, I don't follow the academic history scene much, and don't know anything about those books or those historians, but isn't that the kind of thing that people want to see publicized? How is academic review stopping it?
 

1SGDan

Captain
Joined
Dec 13, 2009
Location
New Hampshire
Unfortunately for the public they getting closer to a 40 to 50 review of the subject, much of academic review prior to this time has been down played or dismissed outright.

Yes that is true early works have been dismissed because evidence suggests it was faulty. Just as the flat world theory was discarded.
 

Battalion

Banned
Joined
Dec 30, 2005
And who do you feel has the right to decide the facts or if I may use your own words: “who defines what is truthful?”



The lost cause school of history has undergone decades of academic review to a predictable result.
Now we have the Race-Baiter School of History.
 

JWheeler331

First Sergeant
Joined
Aug 4, 2010
Location
Louisiana
It's even worse than that. What does the CBF say on the top of a statehouse or courthouse, etc. in the Deep South where there was massive resistance to desegregation and large scale disenfranchisement of the African American vote? The CBF was flown as a symbol of racial oppression, segregation, and disenfrancisement in many instances. To those who agreed with segregation it represented continued defiance of Federal law. To those it targeted it represented official state intimidation.

There are some other issues that arise, such as the CBF being flown higher than the U.S. flag over certain capitol domes and the like. Without having actually witnessed this or having verification, I'll withhold judgement.


You act like the Unions great leader, Lincoln wanted to free the slaves to make them equal. His plans were nothing of the sort being how he was an extreme RACIST himeself.
 
Joined
Jun 24, 2011
Location
Middle Tennessee
Facts change with time and with whom is presenting them All facts are not the truth. Period.

Things can be accepted as fact that are actually not facts at all but misconceptions based on the evidence available at the time or inability or reluctance to accept conclusions that are disagreeable to ones beliefs.
Example: It was believed and accepted as fact that the world was flat, evidence later proved that this was a misconception.
All the evidence concerning the Civil War is in and has been evauated now for 150 years. Nothing new is likely to emerge. Review of this evidence has produced facts, like them or not, concerning causation and results of the war.
You are correct. That has been my point. You can never bank on nothing new to emerge.
 

Mark F. Jenkins

Colonel
Member of the Year
Joined
Mar 31, 2012
Location
Central Ohio
You act like the Unions great leader, Lincoln wanted to free the slaves to make them equal. His plans were nothing of the sort being how he was an extreme RACIST himeself.

That's irrelevant to the issue: the display of the Battle Flag today. Lincoln hasn't had much to say on the matter since he took a trip to the theater.
 

1SGDan

Captain
Joined
Dec 13, 2009
Location
New Hampshire
Now we have the Race-Baiter School of History.

Study wherever you please but poorly researched and factually incorrect posts will still be challenged.
 

1SGDan

Captain
Joined
Dec 13, 2009
Location
New Hampshire
You can never bank on nothing new to emerge.
When it comes to the Civil war I'll take my chances that we have seen all the relevant documentation.
 

Red Harvest

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Apr 10, 2012
You act like the Unions great leader, Lincoln wanted to free the slaves to make them equal. His plans were nothing of the sort being how he was an extreme RACIST himeself.

What are you talking about??? :O o: I didn't say anything about Lincoln or his motivations in this. (Although I would challenge aspects of what you said if it had anything to do with what I posted.) Last time I checked, Lincoln wasn't putting CBF's up on public property. :rolleyes:

...oh, I see what you are doing, creating a strawman argument. :spin:
 

JWheeler331

First Sergeant
Joined
Aug 4, 2010
Location
Louisiana
What are you talking about??? :O o: I didn't say anything about Lincoln or his motivations in this. (Although I would challenge aspects of what you said if it had anything to do with what I posted.) Last time I checked, Lincoln wasn't putting CBF's up on public property. :rolleyes:

...oh, I see what you are doing, creating a strawman argument. :spin:

No sir. Not my intentions. When I read your post it seemed to me that you were implying that the south was trying to keep the black race down while the north had its plans to libirate them and make them equal. If that was not what you were saying then I am sorry I read it that way. I just dont agree with the thoughts that the north was the great friend of the black person and the south was the demon that tried to keep him down. Lincoln was a racist bigot himself but there is Monuments in Washington of him.

I think its safe to say that many of us here can agree to disagree. I find myself and others getting off topic so I will just try to leave it at that. I do respect each person here and their views......even if I dont agree 100% with all of them.
 

cash

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Location
Right here.
All facts are not the truth.

The very definition of a fact, until lawyers get involved, is that it is the truth.

fact

   [fakt] noun
1.
something that actually exists; reality; truth: Your fears have no basis in fact.
2.
something known to exist or to have happened: Space travel is now a fact.
3.
a truth known by actual experience or observation; something known to be true: Scientists gather facts about plant growth.
4.
something said to be true or supposed to have happened: The facts given by the witness are highly questionable.
5.
Law . Often, facts. an actual or alleged event or circumstance, as distinguished from its legal effect or consequence. Compare question of fact, question of law.
 

cash

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Location
Right here.
I didn’t say that, what concerns me is who decides what is correct or incorrect in our schools especially if their opinions are to be the only ones allowed.

I'd say the mainstream of peer-reviewed academic scholarship is the safest bet. Those interested in accurate history would probably agree with that. Those interested in heritage instead of history would probably differ.
 
Joined
Jun 24, 2011
Location
Middle Tennessee
The very definition of a fact, until lawyers get involved, is that it is the truth.

fact

   [fakt] noun
1.
something that actually exists; reality; truth: Your fears have no basis in fact.
2.
something known to exist or to have happened: Space travel is now a fact.
3.
a truth known by actual experience or observation; something known to be true: Scientists gather facts about plant growth.
4.
something said to be true or supposed to have happened: The facts given by the witness are highly questionable.
5.
Law . Often, facts. an actual or alleged event or circumstance, as distinguished from its legal effect or consequence. Compare question of fact, question of law.
I refer to your Number 4 on your list. I stated that ALL facts are not truth.
 

cash

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Location
Right here.
It's even worse than that. What does the CBF say on the top of a statehouse or courthouse, etc. in the Deep South where there was massive resistance to desegregation and large scale disenfranchisement of the African American vote? The CBF was flown as a symbol of racial oppression, segregation, and disenfrancisement in many instances. To those who agreed with segregation it represented continued defiance of Federal law. To those it targeted it represented official state intimidation.

There are some other issues that arise, such as the CBF being flown higher than the U.S. flag over certain capitol domes and the like. Without having actually witnessed this or having verification, I'll withhold judgement.

Kind of what I was getting at with the large matchstick monument. How about we put a monument of a large matchstick at city hall or municipal building of every city and town in the former confederacy with a quote from Sherman, "War is cruelty, it cannot be refined," and a warning that if they try it again they'll get more of the same? Can they just "not look at it?"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top