What's obvious is that the arrests we've seen so far have been of white dudes. No surprise to me at all.
Honestly, Mr. Winkler asked about the rationale for removing the statues and I tried to provide some primary sources, as did Mr. Winkler. Isn't that what we should be doing on this thread? Shouldn't posts be at least facially relevant?
Strange, you would think that a war industry using slave labor would not be something you would want to commemorate.Perhaps the rationale is that Confederate Memorials/Monuments continue to distort history. Here's a monument that was dedicated during the Sesquicentennial, in 2013. It's dedication was noted by a thread here on CWT. If you take a look at the monument, the part about Shelby Iron Company mentions "Extraordinary Service to the CSA" in the beginning and "TO HONOR SHELBY IRON COMPANY AND BRAVE CONFEDERATE SOLDIERS OF SHELBY COUNTY." You can read the inscription on wikipedia .
Nowhere in this memorial installed in 2013 is the fact that the first quota for slaves was set at 350 enslaved people to work at the ironworks during the Civil War. According to a source by Douglas Blackman, 350 to 400 slaves at a time were leased from owners in Alabama to work at the ironworks, since most of the white labor force had been conscripted. But somehow the contribution of the slaves escaped mention on the monument. http://shelby.ehclients.com/index.php/history/slavery
Douglas Blackman's excerpt on Shelby Iron Company and its slave labor is here:
https://books.google.com/books?id=2v-BYWrjl9IC&pg=PT58&lpg=PT58&dq=shelby+ironworks+++run+by+slaves&source=bl&ots=LheDej3LVf&sig=S17jKmPdh2HtakIGBgqe15uU19k&hl=en&sa=X&ei=oL-WVcawNYGKsQWT3IDQCA&ved=0CDIQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=shelby ironworks + run by slaves&f=false
View attachment 72526
Pat, in their day the bog stompers were very good slavers. There isn't a group on earth or in history that doesn't have something in their past that someone else disapproves of.Strange, you would think that a war industry using slave labor would not be something you would want to commemorate.
If you read the post he was reacting to, you might notice it was about a monument installed in 2013. Then you might not find it so necessary to be snide.Maybe by not opening the calendar they got from the local bank? It's 2015, Mr. Raines. It's also OK to accept what was over 150 years ago. It ain't so any more.
1. Slave labor is and was a fact. It's history. My approval or disapproval doesn't matter or change a thing. To pretend otherwise is just stupid.How does anyone approve of slave labor in 2013?
Its use by hate groups is a legitimate part of the flag's history as well as part of southern heritage. There is no "blurring," unless you refer to the part of history you'd rather remember vs. the part you'd rather not.The use of the CBF by hate groups has blurred the lines between history and hatred.
I can understand their position, that it's seen as a symbol of slavery, but it really irks me that they refuse to even attempt to understand my position that it's a symbol of my Southern heritage and honoring my ancestors that fought for their homes.
I am somewhat exhausted over this subject, but I do feel a need to correct an inaccuracy. You say that the "use of the CBF by hate groups has blurred the lines between history and hatred." That is not correct. It was not only used by hate groups. It was used by governmental officials and civilians — "regular people" — during the resistance to the civil rights movement.The use of the CBF by hate groups has blurred the lines between history and hatred.
Like ForeverFree, I am fairly well exhausted by this topic, but I can't let this pass. I have heard the slogan 'heritage not hate' evoked more times than I care to remember. What I can never get past is how a large part of what goes along with the heritage of that flag is the amount of hatred associated with the flag. In other words, the heritage is or cannot be divorced from the hatred. Our Southern heritage is a legacy of hatred and oppression. Our ancestors weren't simply fighting for their homes - they were rebelling against the lawful government because they believed slavery was endangered. I think part of the issue is that it is hard to objectively recognize everything that goes with the heritage.I can understand their position, that it's seen as a symbol of slavery, but it really irks me that they refuse to even attempt to understand my position that it's a symbol of my Southern heritage and honoring my ancestors that fought for their homes.