Historical Monuments

Politics, Religion, Salsa Recipes, etc. Everything you shouldn't bring up at your Uncle's house.

Historical Monuments

Postby Seahawks4Ever » Sun Aug 27, 2017 9:56 am

I don't know about the rest of you, but, I have ancestors on BOTH sides of the conflict. I keep reading that most of these "Civil War" monuments were erected by the KKK during the "Jim Crow" era. What a load of BALDERDASH!!! They were put up by the Daughters of the Confederacy, yes, during the era of Jim Crow but NOT by the KKK.

This removing or, even worse, this covering up of historical monuments is shear MADNESS. If you want to start a second
Civil War just keep up this utter stupidity. I just read about a tiny out of the way monument to Lee that was so small no one could even see it from the highway, there wasn't even parking for people to pull over and look at it, yet, it now has been dragged in to this made up controversy.

I HATE the KKK, NAZIs, neo or otherwise, and ALL RACISTS, not just those who hate people of color, I hate those who disparage anybody who is not like themselves.

I have to sat though, do we really NEED a statue to Nathan Bedford Forrest, the founder of the KKK???? OK, but any statue of NBF should be accompanied with information that puts it into the proper context, not just a veneration. That man does NOT deserve veneration!

Yes, yes, yes there are plenty of history books. But the history of the Civil War is taught much different in Massachusetts than is the "War Between the States" down in Georgia. So, putting these monuments in their proper context is fine, but not just to tear them down or even worse, hide them away as if they never existed.

My Great, Great Grandmother was a little girl during that war, she remembered vividly when her father read the "Emancipation Proclamation" to the slaves he had up until that time, owned. The "older" ones stayed but the younger ones left. At the end of the war, my family didn't have anything left, the Confederacy had taken it all. My family moved to California and half (my half) of the family then moved up here to Washington State, Spokane to be exact. In fact, many, many people who were Southerners left the South after the war, many of those who wave the Stars and Bars are the Sons and Daughters of the Carpet Baggers who came down from the North to pick over the bones of what was left of the South. These were the people who lead Reconstruction and it was those abuses which led directly to the formation of the KKK and the Jim Crow laws that came later. I am in NO WAY trying to justify those abominable institutions, I am just saying that there is more to the story and the WHOLE story should be told.

This nation has got along for decades respecting each other and it didn't hurt that many families were like mine with combatants on both sides. Now, even the United States Military has OFFICIALLY declared that soldiers who were in the Confederate Army or Navy were INDEED AMERICANS and their service as well as their deeds should be honored as those who fought on the side of the Union.

THE WAR IS OVER!!! Been over, and we don't need a bunch of rabble rousers trying to reignite it all over again. I do not support those that are trying to divide us. That is an age old tactic, DIVIDE AND CONQUER! Those that are working hard to divide us really want to conquer us by destroying our Great Republic. Do NOT fall for it! Our Founding Fathers, flawed as they were, knew exactly what they were doing when they wrote both the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution, and, less known or studied but more important, the Federalist Papers. Want to know how the Founding Fathers really felt about the 2nd. Amendment?? Read the Federalist Papers! It is ALL There. Want to know if your law maker is or is not doing their job? Read the Federalist Papers!! Want to know if your President has of has not over stepped their authority??? Read the Federalist Papers!!!
Seahawks4Ever
Legacy
 
Posts: 1280
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2014 12:56 pm

Re: Historical Monuments

Postby Aseahawkfan » Sun Aug 27, 2017 12:33 pm

If the South wants to start a Civil War over the removal of Confederate monuments, I welcome it. I will join to smash the South one more time and their attempt ressurrect that sick period of history and their attempt to enshrine fighting for slavery. This pretense that slavery wasn't the main issue of contention is historical hogwash. And this attempt by the South to keep symbols and monuments to Southern leaders that fought for slavery is just another veiled attempt to keep their racist philosophy alive and well. KKK and Neo-Nazis marching in those states is a prime example of the philosophy these monuments promote.

If you want a Civil War again, bring it. I despise the Confederate monuments and flag. I despise everything they stand for. The moral traitors that supported the South need to be expunged from the public eye. I agree with the poster that said it's like celebrating Hitler or other Nazi figures that fought on behalf of Germany's Nazi philosophy. The Southern folk supporting the confederacy fought to protect enslaving people, the only issue the North and South had major disagreements concerning. No one was trying to take away any part of the Southern Way of Life other than slavery. That needed to go long ago.

If you want to fight to protect symbols and statues of slavery protectors, we will fight again gladly to smash this rubbish once and for all.

If you really hate the KKK and Nazis, then you should understand what these monuments meant to ancestors of the enslaved folk. The entire South was the equivalent of the KKK or Nazis when the war was fought. They were enslaving people. They used a profession known as a slave breaker who was paid to break the SPIRIT of overly-spirited slaves (meaning slaves that didn't want to be enslaved). These Southern generals fought to maintain slavery, the turning of people into chattel and farm animals. These monuments need to go with maybe a few kept in a museum to show the stupidity of people even erecting monuments to the protectors of slavery.
Aseahawkfan
Legacy
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 12:38 am

Re: Historical Monuments

Postby c_hawkbob » Sun Aug 27, 2017 2:25 pm

Growing up in Edmonds the confederate flag didn't mean anything more to me than a cool car on a TV show, but now, living in the middle of it (the city I live in is having the debate right now about removing it's own monuments) and seeing the the flag flown so prominently beside the Nazi flag by the a-holes in those demonstrations dominating the news right now I've got to side with the friends I have at work that are offended by those flags and monuments and and living in so much greater fear now than they were before this last election.

It's great for me to say "well it doesn't mean that to me", but I didn't grow up black in the south and live through the struggles to gain equal rights, I don't think it up to me to make that judgement.
User avatar
c_hawkbob
Legacy
 
Posts: 3129
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 3:34 pm
Location: K-evil Kentucky, 42053

Re: Historical Monuments

Postby RiverDog » Sun Aug 27, 2017 6:12 pm

The monuments and other symbols, like the Stars and Bars, do have a story to tell and I will resist any attempt to whitewash or sterilize our history, but they need to be displayed in their proper perspective at appropriate venues, like museums, cemeteries, and historical parks, places that are specifically designated for this purpose. Same goes for all other distasteful aspects of our history, such as the relocation and internment of Japanese Americans during WW2, the Trail of Tears, and so on. We do not want to suggest to others that our country wasn't, and certainly isn't today, home to a perfect society. Understanding what hate groups look like, how they were formed, their thought process, and so on, is essential if we are to expect our posterity to be educated enough to recognize them when they surface again in the future.

But I absolutely understand why people object to them being displayed in public parks and courthouses and support their prompt removal from such places. They should in no way be used as icons of our present day government.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 7232
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: Historical Monuments

Postby Old but Slow » Sun Aug 27, 2017 7:47 pm

It may be a point of pride for many, but for people of color it something else. It represents hate, slavery, lynchings, church burnings, and more. Wave the Stars and Bars (I don't like capitalizing that flag) in front of a group of those people and it is a threat and a challenge as if it were spoken.
Old but Slow
Legacy
 
Posts: 871
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2013 12:05 pm
Location: Bellingham, WA 98225

Re: Historical Monuments

Postby Hawktawk » Fri Sep 01, 2017 5:26 am

I was torn about removing these statues until I saw first hand in Charlottesville the kind of utter POS that were most offended by it and now I say TAKE THEM DOWN!!!!!!
Put them in a museum so the skinheads and Nazis who want to worship a participation trophy house for losers and traitors can still get their chub on.
Put a statue of Chump in there too, he's a skinhead and neo Nazi sympathizer.
Hawktawk
Legacy
 
Posts: 2705
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:57 am

Re: Historical Monuments

Postby RiverDog » Fri Sep 01, 2017 12:35 pm

Old but Slow wrote:It may be a point of pride for many, but for people of color it something else. It represents hate, slavery, lynchings, church burnings, and more. Wave the Stars and Bars (I don't like capitalizing that flag) in front of a group of those people and it is a threat and a challenge as if it were spoken.


The Stars and Bars represents an interesting dichotomy. It wasn't that long ago that the Confederate flag was considered to be inoffensive, and simply a symbol of the south and not necessarily of those despicable hate groups. It just represented run of the mill good ole boy rednecks, like from the Dukes of Hazard fame. For years, we saw truckers displaying it on the front of their grills, and I personally knew some that did, and never thought of them as being bigots. As a matter of fact, as recently as 1987, Arkansas governor Bill Clinton actually signed into law a bill honoring the flag, detailing that "the blue star above the word ‘ARKANSAS’ is to commemorate the Confederate States of America.” I'm no fan of Slick Willy's, but I sincerely doubt that he's a confederate flag waving racist.

I do agree with taking it down and relegating it to cemeteries, historical parks, and museums, but somewhere along the line, the meaning of it changed, and for the life of me, I can't figure out exactly when or how and would feel enlightened if someone could give me a rational explanation as to how we got to this current dilemma.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 7232
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: Historical Monuments

Postby Largent80 » Fri Sep 01, 2017 3:07 pm

People wigging out over statues, while people from all over the world come together to help Houston and Texas recover from Harvey.
User avatar
Largent80
Legacy
 
Posts: 981
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 1:38 pm
Location: Magnolia, Texas

Re: Historical Monuments

Postby RiverDog » Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:06 pm

Largent80 wrote:People wigging out over statues, while people from all over the world come together to help Houston and Texas recover from Harvey.


Yea, that's just it. It's too bad that it takes a war, a natural disaster, or something truly life changing for us to realize how trivial we can all be from time to time.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 7232
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: Historical Monuments

Postby Largent80 » Sat Sep 02, 2017 5:57 am

^^^True. But it is nice to see regardless. One of my best friends in Lake Stevens is adopting 2 displaced Houston dogs.

The fact that these statues were ever even erected is sad actually, but fighting over them is just ridiculous. Just get rid of all of them.
User avatar
Largent80
Legacy
 
Posts: 981
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 1:38 pm
Location: Magnolia, Texas

Re: Historical Monuments

Postby RiverDog » Sat Sep 02, 2017 8:33 am

Well, let's just hope that the goodwill displayed by our citizens during the immediate response to this tragedy carries over into the long term aftermath.

I'm growing a little weary of this monument debate. At some point, people need to quit worrying so damn much over a stupid piece of rock or piece of cloth and concentrate their efforts on more important things. At this point, all they're doing is giving these A-hole attention seeking white supremacists a rallying cry.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 7232
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: Historical Monuments

Postby rocket » Mon Oct 02, 2017 6:34 pm

The law says that the Confederate soldiers be given the same attention and privileges as all other US soldiers.

Best change that first.
rocket
Legacy
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:50 pm

Re: Historical Monuments

Postby c_hawkbob » Tue Oct 03, 2017 4:28 am

These monuments aren't of "soldiers'. That law was, rightly, intended to insure equal treatment and entitlements for all combatants after the war. there are none of those left. That law is not relevant to this situation.
User avatar
c_hawkbob
Legacy
 
Posts: 3129
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 3:34 pm
Location: K-evil Kentucky, 42053

Re: Historical Monuments

Postby Seahawkgal » Wed Oct 04, 2017 10:47 am

I have a different take about all these monuments, etc.
Leave them alone while pointing out the facts that they were the 'LOSERS' of an awful war. Also point out what they were fighting for so we never forget the travesty of the Confederate's point of view. Kinda like the concentration camps in Europe staying up as museums and places for people to visit. It is not glorifying the Nazi regime at all. Quite the opposite IMO.
Unfortunately, slavery is a part of American history. It should never be erased to appease some agenda. It happened and it should never be forgotten so injustices never happen again.
Seahawkgal
Legacy
 
Posts: 22
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 8:08 am

Re: Historical Monuments

Postby RiverDog » Wed Oct 04, 2017 7:28 pm

Seahawkgal wrote:I have a different take about all these monuments, etc.
Leave them alone while pointing out the facts that they were the 'LOSERS' of an awful war. Also point out what they were fighting for so we never forget the travesty of the Confederate's point of view. Kinda like the concentration camps in Europe staying up as museums and places for people to visit. It is not glorifying the Nazi regime at all. Quite the opposite IMO.
Unfortunately, slavery is a part of American history. It should never be erased to appease some agenda. It happened and it should never be forgotten so injustices never happen again.


Wow, someone actually agrees with me!

The only change I'd make is the same point that I've made earlier in this debate, that the statutes and monuments should be moved to a more appropriate place, like a cemetery or historical park, and not displayed in a public park or courthouse.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 7232
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: Historical Monuments

Postby burrrton » Sat Oct 28, 2017 11:46 am

Hey, 'anti-monument' fanatics- want to know how to obliterate your cause? Like this:

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing- ... s-memorial

Validating every person that maintained taking down Confederate statues wasn't about the moral bankruptcy of the Confederacy.
User avatar
burrrton
Legacy
 
Posts: 2983
Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2013 7:20 am

Re: Historical Monuments

Postby RiverDog » Sat Oct 28, 2017 12:23 pm

burrrton wrote:Hey, 'anti-monument' fanatics- want to know how to obliterate your cause? Like this:

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing- ... s-memorial

Validating every person that maintained taking down Confederate statues wasn't about the moral bankruptcy of the Confederacy.


I saw that. Just a couple of observations:

This differs from the current debate as it's a private church, not a public park or courthouse supported by taxpayer dollars.

I'm not sure why the monuments to Washington and Lee were in the church in the first place. I've been inside a number of churches and I've never seen such monuments to anyone outside someone or some representation connected directly to that particular religion.

I wonder if there's another part to this story. Were they forced to remove the Washington monument if all they wanted to do was take the one for Lee out? It seems like they were a pair.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 7232
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: Historical Monuments

Postby Aseahawkfan » Sat Oct 28, 2017 1:07 pm

I don't think Washington or Jefferson in the long-term will survive their support of slavery. Their statues will eventually be removed as well.

Sorry guys, slavery is going to continue to haunt this nation into the modern day. It was an evil every bit as bad as the Nazis extermination of the Jews and many of our Founders were slavers along with the good parts. They will not be admirable men to many future generations that read about their participation in slavery. Overlooking the evil by saying they were men of their time is a salve that will not work for all. As this nation's demographics change more and more, people revered by many will come under fire for the original evil that was allowed to continue in this nation until Lincoln finally had enough backbone to do something about it.
Aseahawkfan
Legacy
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 12:38 am

Re: Historical Monuments

Postby burrrton » Sat Oct 28, 2017 2:28 pm

I don't think Washington or Jefferson in the long-term will survive their support of slavery. Their statues will eventually be removed as well.


Which is what will eventually kill the movement.

Many of them were *very* flawed men, but I'm sorry, 'men of their time' is a legitimate point, and that doesn't excuse the evil of the practice. Virtually *nobody* at that time viewed it the way we do now (regretfully)- the practice was literally ubiquitous, with the vast majority of 'owners' being non-white around the world.

That doesn't excuse anyone, but it has to be viewed through the lens of the 18th century, not the 20th/21st, and to pretend that is the ultimate defining characteristic of men that created the greatest force for good in the history of the planet is insane (and will be the movement's undoing).

MLK Jr. had a *seriously* flawed personal life, but I'll be damned if I'm going to allow anyone to maintain that's a disqualifying characteristic for remembering him among our country's greats.

Sorry guys, slavery is going to continue to haunt this nation into the modern day.


It haunt's *humanity*, not this nation- there was nothing unique about the US as it relates to slavery except that we fought a war to kill it.
User avatar
burrrton
Legacy
 
Posts: 2983
Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2013 7:20 am

Re: Historical Monuments

Postby Aseahawkfan » Sun Oct 29, 2017 2:00 pm

burrrton wrote:Which is what will eventually kill the movement.

Many of them were *very* flawed men, but I'm sorry, 'men of their time' is a legitimate point, and that doesn't excuse the evil of the practice. Virtually *nobody* at that time viewed it the way we do now (regretfully)- the practice was literally ubiquitous, with the vast majority of 'owners' being non-white around the world.

That doesn't excuse anyone, but it has to be viewed through the lens of the 18th century, not the 20th/21st, and to pretend that is the ultimate defining characteristic of men that created the greatest force for good in the history of the planet is insane (and will be the movement's undoing).

MLK Jr. had a *seriously* flawed personal life, but I'll be damned if I'm going to allow anyone to maintain that's a disqualifying characteristic for remembering him among our country's greats

It haunt's *humanity*, not this nation- there was nothing unique about the US as it relates to slavery except that we fought a war to kill it.


I don't believe the future generations will see it that way. Perhaps historians and students of history, but not the general people. It is nearly impossible for folk of African descent to look with admiration to men that treated their ancestors like livestock and started a racial hierarchy that has haunted this nation into the modern day. There's no way either of us will prove our opinion unless we're able to come back in a few hundred years, likely to a nation neither of us would enjoy.

It's strange. Very few of the heavy slave nations still exist and the ones that do rid themselves of their minority groups either through breeding (South/Central America) or driving them out or killing them (Middle East/Asia) or they were part of the same ethnic group and there is no way to discern the difference (Most slave nations other than America).

And they did not build a racial hierarchy out of it and then allowed the former group to live with them, nor do they have the same conditions we do for modifying the demographics of a nation. The one part of Western Democracy no one much discusses that is not shared by many other nations that haven't embraced Western-style Democracy is the heavy immigration that leads to modified Demographics and the dilution of culture. Places like China, Russia, India, and the Middle East don't have huge influxes of immigrants breeding and changing the ethnic and cultural demographics of the nation in the way we do. The only other nations that have this occurring are those in Europe.

Immigrantts do not look to the Founders of this nation as noble men if they know who they are at all. If the left continues to repaint history through a modern moral lens, then teach it to generations of a younger, far more diverse group including the children of immigrants, I doubt you will see the same admiration or approval for our slave-owning founders.

I do agree that slavery did plague the entire human race, but ours was a unique racial hierarchy as well as other unique elements such as the former slave group differed greatly in physical characteristics from the slavers and the former slaves remained in the nation continuing to suffer under severely unfair laws. American slavery was a fairly unique form of slavery in so far that it tried to make a single, particular group of people into animals without any clear, legal path to freedom. Usually old world slavery was less focused on a particular group and more random capturing of any people that couldn't resist.

Either way, we're likely not to see it in our lifetime. I expect it in a few hundred years when this nation's European bloodlines are reduced to very small majority or a minority as they get out-bred by Central/South Americans and other immigrants.
Aseahawkfan
Legacy
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 12:38 am

Re: Historical Monuments

Postby idhawkman » Sun Oct 29, 2017 8:59 pm

Don't forget the Chinese slaves America had.

I wonder if European decent Americans will get minority status when they become the minority.
User avatar
idhawkman
Legacy
 
Posts: 455
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2017 7:00 am

Re: Historical Monuments

Postby RiverDog » Mon Oct 30, 2017 1:43 pm

The reason that otherwise decent, respectable men like Washington and Jefferson could rationalize their position on slavery was that at the time, blacks were not considered to be "men", aka humans. Otherwise, they could not have adapted phrases like "all men are created equal". They were considered property, almost like an inanimate object. Like virtually all white men of that time, they were a product of 18th century thinking.

Our sense of morality evolves just like our bodies evolve. We are not necessarily born with a sense of fairness or right and wrong. Most of us have to acquire it via life experiences. You read or listen to men like Lincoln or MLK and think to yourself "Holy cow, that makes sense". Washington and Jefferson did not have the benefit of experiencing Lincoln and MLK as I did, so their minds evolved differently.

So, speaking for myself, I cannot criticize George and Tom for their positions on slavery as I would be doing so from an unfair position. They did not have the same benefit of learning from other's mistakes or misdeeds as I did.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 7232
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: Historical Monuments

Postby RiverDog » Mon Oct 30, 2017 1:59 pm

I have an experience from my best friend that I'd like to share with you guys, and this seems to be an appropriate thread as the discussion has been about slavery, social injustice, and so on.

I have a friend that is about 80 years old. He was born in Seneca, Oregon, a little town south of John Day in eastern Oregon. His dad was a logger. Logging back then was very similar to the coal mining industry. Companies owned large tracts of land, would house their employees in towns owned entirely by the company, paid them in company currency that could be used to buy goods at company owned stores.

One day, my friend's dad was seriously injured in an on the job injury. I can't recall the specifics of the injury, but it was bad enough that it prevented him from working for several months. The company not only laid him off, as his landlord, they kicked him and his family out of the house because he couldn't pay the rent. They ended up living in a box car until he got well enough that he could return to work.

The reason I'm sharing this story is to dramatize the fact of just how bad things were back in the day, and it wasn't just blacks and minorities that were abused, it was anyone that wasn't privileged enough to be born on the right side of the railroad tracks.

Today, I can't imagine anyone with half a brain doing to a family what the logging company did to my friend's family, nor can I imagine how anyone could rationalize slavery. But it damn sure existed as recently as 80 years ago. Our sensitivity has to have evolved, it's not something we were born with, at least not all of us.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 7232
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: Historical Monuments

Postby Aseahawkfan » Mon Oct 30, 2017 5:18 pm

idhawkman wrote:Don't forget the Chinese slaves America had.

I wonder if European decent Americans will get minority status when they become the minority.


If they started getting oppressed and mistreated by the majority over a long period of time, sure, they might.

The Chinese slaves and native Americans and the mistreatment of Indians by the English and the natives of South and Central America by the Spanish is the reason why eventually as they grow they will not look kindly on men like George and Tom.
Aseahawkfan
Legacy
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 12:38 am

Re: Historical Monuments

Postby Aseahawkfan » Mon Oct 30, 2017 5:22 pm

RiverDog wrote:The reason that otherwise decent, respectable men like Washington and Jefferson could rationalize their position on slavery was that at the time, blacks were not considered to be "men", aka humans. Otherwise, they could not have adapted phrases like "all men are created equal". They were considered property, almost like an inanimate object. Like virtually all white men of that time, they were a product of 18th century thinking.

Our sense of morality evolves just like our bodies evolve. We are not necessarily born with a sense of fairness or right and wrong. Most of us have to acquire it via life experiences. You read or listen to men like Lincoln or MLK and think to yourself "Holy cow, that makes sense". Washington and Jefferson did not have the benefit of experiencing Lincoln and MLK as I did, so their minds evolved differently.

So, speaking for myself, I cannot criticize George and Tom for their positions on slavery as I would be doing so from an unfair position. They did not have the same benefit of learning from other's mistakes or misdeeds as I did.


You're a man of European descent. It will never be the same for you. Not judging a man like Tom or George will not change what an African man will feel when he thinks back to the days of his ancestors and imagine those same men telling his ancestor he was an animal that didn't deserve to be free, not even giving his ancestor the choice of a different life. Like it or not, George and Tom knew what they were doing was wrong. If you read some of their statements and saw their actions later, they knew it well as did most Americans of that time. They knew they were doing an evil, but justified it. It will cost them in time as it should.

This pretense that they didn't know any better is rubbish. Slavery had been abolished in other nations prior to the creation of America. It had been disallowed in England for many, many years. Fact is American slavery started as all evils do: small and overlooked until it grew beyond the control and must be halted by good men finally having the courage and will to stop it.

The reason I think so highly of Lincoln is one of the reasons you stated: this was a nation indoctrinated into slavery and to think of the African as subhuman. Even many of The Founders believed in slavery and taught it to future generations. It had been in this land for centuries. Men had tried to stop it prior and failed. Even John Adams as well as several other founders did not like slavery, but could not stop it. You can read how these men, our Founders knew slavery was wrong, but had not the will to stand against it. Then came Lincoln. A man that for some reason had all the necessary traits to somehow hold this nation together and start the eradication of slavery. His life seems so much like a heroic book. Strange how real life turns out that way sometimes.

Can you imagine being Lincoln? Lincoln, your first mission if you choose to accept it as leader of the new Republican party is to win the presidency, dismantle slavery, and hold the nation together. Good luck, sir. If the Misslon Impossible theme had existed back then, it would have been playing as Lincoln took the presidency.
Aseahawkfan
Legacy
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 12:38 am

Re: Historical Monuments

Postby RiverDog » Mon Oct 30, 2017 5:57 pm

Aseahawkfan wrote:You're a man of European descent. It will never be the same for you. Not judging a man like Tom or George will not change what an African man will feel when he thinks back to the days of his ancestors and imagine those same men telling his ancestor he was an animal that didn't deserve to be free, not even giving his ancestor the choice of a different life. Like it or not, George and Tom knew what they were doing was wrong. If you read some of their statements and saw their actions later, they knew it well as did most Americans of that time. They knew they were doing an evil, but justified it. It will cost them in time as it should.

This pretense that they didn't know any better is rubbish. Slavery had been abolished in other nations prior to the creation of America. It had been disallowed in England for many, many years. Fact is American slavery started as all evils do: small and overlooked until it grew beyond the control and must be halted by good men finally having the courage and will to stop it.

The reason I think so highly of Lincoln is one of the reasons you stated: this was a nation indoctrinated into slavery and to think of the African as subhuman. Even many of The Founders believed in slavery and taught it to future generations. It had been in this land for centuries. Men had tried to stop it prior and failed. Even John Adams as well as several other founders did not like slavery, but could not stop it. You can read how these men, our Founders knew slavery was wrong, but had not the will to stand against it. Then came Lincoln. A man that for some reason had all the necessary traits to somehow hold this nation together and start the eradication of slavery. His life seems so much like a heroic book. Strange how real life turns out that way sometimes.

Can you imagine being Lincoln? Lincoln, your first mission if you choose to accept it as leader of the new Republican party is to win the presidency, dismantle slavery, and hold the nation together. Good luck, sir. If the Misslon Impossible theme had existed back then, it would have been playing as Lincoln took the presidency.


It would have been impossible for Lincoln to exist had it not been for the founding fathers. We would have been ruled by a monarchy or a dictatorship. There's no way a man raised in a log cabin and self educated could have ever acceded to the head of state had it not been for a system of government established by the founding fathers.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 7232
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: Historical Monuments

Postby idhawkman » Mon Oct 30, 2017 6:33 pm

Aseahawkfan wrote:
If they started getting oppressed and mistreated by the majority over a long period of time, sure, they might.

The Chinese slaves and native Americans and the mistreatment of Indians by the English and the natives of South and Central America by the Spanish is the reason why eventually as they grow they will not look kindly on men like George and Tom.


It doesn't matter if you are being oppressed, you only have to be a minority. What form have you filled out that asks your race and qualifies it with "fill in only if you are oppressed"? When Affirmative Action stats are submitted by corporations, they don't qualify the minorities in whether they have been oppressed or not. All you have to do is be a minority.
User avatar
idhawkman
Legacy
 
Posts: 455
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2017 7:00 am

Re: Historical Monuments

Postby Seahawks4Ever » Tue Oct 31, 2017 9:16 pm

RD: I know you are very anti-union yet do you not know that these abuses that you speak of only ended when the miners and the rail road workers unionized, and they had to fight and have a lot of their blood in order to get the right to unionize. I am sorry you had a bad experience the short period of time you were in a union. The Democratic Party slit their own throats by turning their back on Labor. If they want to enjoy majorities in Congress and in state houses across the country they need toi remember their roots and again work and fight again for the "regular" people.
Seahawks4Ever
Legacy
 
Posts: 1280
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2014 12:56 pm

Re: Historical Monuments

Postby RiverDog » Wed Nov 01, 2017 5:40 am

Seahawks4Ever wrote:RD: I know you are very anti-union yet do you not know that these abuses that you speak of only ended when the miners and the rail road workers unionized, and they had to fight and have a lot of their blood in order to get the right to unionize. I am sorry you had a bad experience the short period of time you were in a union. The Democratic Party slit their own throats by turning their back on Labor. If they want to enjoy majorities in Congress and in state houses across the country they need toi remember their roots and again work and fight again for the "regular" people.


I am anti union in today's world. I fully acknowledge union's positive role in shaping our workplace starting back in the 20's and 30's. But IMO they are as outdated as a buggy whip factory in the modern workplace that's more service orientated and less manufacturing orientated than it was back in the day that I referred to in my previous post. I brought that up just to highlight the fact that past abuses were not always race orientated.

The difference between then and now is that there are laws, lawyers, and all sorts of government agencies that exist today that weren't there nearly a century ago when unions got their start, agencies like OSHA, Fair Labor Relations Board, Human Rights Commission, Department of Labor and Industries, and so on, both at the state and federal levels, that are available to all workers, non union as well as union, salaried as well as hourly. The travesty is that most people are unaware of the resources and protections that are available to them if they feel like they are being taken advantage of. As a member of management of a Fortune 500 company, I can attest to the fact that managers are much more afraid of provoking a government agency than they are a union.

I'm not sure if it were unions per se that turning their backs on that hurt the Dems. Trump didn't reach out to unions, either. As a matter of fact, the Clinton campaign made a huge mistake in not bringing to the conversation some of the unethical labor practices that Trump's businesses engaged in and that he did little to stop. What Trump did well, and how IMO he won the presidency, was campaigning on a theme of "America First" and was able to paint Dems as the party too willing to negotiate trade agreements that compromised traditional American businesses like auto and steel. It just so happened that those states with workers that got hurt more by trade agreements were in the battleground that was contested vs. areas like California, Washington, and New York that are more dependent on overseas trade than the midsection of the country.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 7232
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: Historical Monuments

Postby burrrton » Wed Nov 01, 2017 8:25 am

Slavery had been abolished in other nations prior to the creation of America.


https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-slav ... 4920070322

Also, pretending being a slave is somehow less bad if your owner is a minority of some kind is not just wrong, but offensive. It's a pox on humanity equally no matter its form.
User avatar
burrrton
Legacy
 
Posts: 2983
Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2013 7:20 am

Re: Historical Monuments

Postby Aseahawkfan » Wed Nov 01, 2017 6:39 pm

RiverDog wrote:It would have been impossible for Lincoln to exist had it not been for the founding fathers. We would have been ruled by a monarchy or a dictatorship. There's no way a man raised in a log cabin and self educated could have ever acceded to the head of state had it not been for a system of government established by the founding fathers.


True. But at the same time, you don't forgive Hitler for rebuilding Germany into a world power after it was decimated after World War 2. As more and more dark people of differing descent rise up in this nation, they will not look kindly on men that engaged in acts nearly the equivalent of the Nazis. The only reason this hasn't happened yet is because men and women of European descent like yourself are still willing and able to hold the line against the full on attack on the Founders and their association with slavery.

I'm not saying I agree that it should happen, I'm just telling you it will eventually happen. Just as you are watching Confederate monuments torn down and Hollywood old school sexism dismantled, you will one day see The Founders hammered for slavery. Many of the incoming immigrants don't care about The Founders, don't learn about them much, and won't teach their children to value them. And if you're a dark-skinned person, once you learn the Founders thought of you as subhuman, you will truly turn off to admiring them.

It is an inevitable occurrence that The Founders will be admired by a smaller and smaller group as people of European descent no longer hold the majority. How long that will take, who can say? All I know is I talk to this younger generation and they could care less about The Founders. Most immigrants I talk to don't even know who they are or care to learn other than to pass their citizenship test. And in the African community, they are not well-loved at all.
Aseahawkfan
Legacy
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 12:38 am

Re: Historical Monuments

Postby Aseahawkfan » Wed Nov 01, 2017 6:55 pm

RiverDog wrote:I am anti union in today's world. I fully acknowledge union's positive role in shaping our workplace starting back in the 20's and 30's. But IMO they are as outdated as a buggy whip factory in the modern workplace that's more service orientated and less manufacturing orientated than it was back in the day that I referred to in my previous post. I brought that up just to highlight the fact that past abuses were not always race orientated.

The difference between then and now is that there are laws, lawyers, and all sorts of government agencies that exist today that weren't there nearly a century ago when unions got their start, agencies like OSHA, Fair Labor Relations Board, Human Rights Commission, Department of Labor and Industries, and so on, both at the state and federal levels, that are available to all workers, non union as well as union, salaried as well as hourly. The travesty is that most people are unaware of the resources and protections that are available to them if they feel like they are being taken advantage of. As a member of management of a Fortune 500 company, I can attest to the fact that managers are much more afraid of provoking a government agency than they are a union.

I'm not sure if it were unions per se that turning their backs on that hurt the Dems. Trump didn't reach out to unions, either. As a matter of fact, the Clinton campaign made a huge mistake in not bringing to the conversation some of the unethical labor practices that Trump's businesses engaged in and that he did little to stop. What Trump did well, and how IMO he won the presidency, was campaigning on a theme of "America First" and was able to paint Dems as the party too willing to negotiate trade agreements that compromised traditional American businesses like auto and steel. It just so happened that those states with workers that got hurt more by trade agreements were in the battleground that was contested vs. areas like California, Washington, and New York that are more dependent on overseas trade than the midsection of the country.


I don't agree that unions are useless, but they need to modernize. They are archaic right now in a workplace changing faster than they are. If they don't start looking to offer value to employers, they will be watching themselves replaced by robots and automation due to their crazy demands. I recall reading about the Detroit auto unions having a nap room in the plant. Some of the union demands are ridiculous for removal of problem workers. At what point does the union have to provide real value to the employer in terms of production and expectations before they stop protecting lamers that don't do their job.
Aseahawkfan
Legacy
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 12:38 am

Re: Historical Monuments

Postby RiverDog » Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:13 am

Aseahawkfan wrote:I don't agree that unions are useless, but they need to modernize. They are archaic right now in a workplace changing faster than they are. If they don't start looking to offer value to employers, they will be watching themselves replaced by robots and automation due to their crazy demands. I recall reading about the Detroit auto unions having a nap room in the plant. Some of the union demands are ridiculous for removal of problem workers. At what point does the union have to provide real value to the employer in terms of production and expectations before they stop protecting lamers that don't do their job.


Nice post, and I agree.

In a lot of situations, just the threat of a union is enough to keep an employer sensitive to the needs of their employees. There's also certain situations where a 3rd party advocate is helpful, especially where language barriers might be a hindrance, so there can be a role for them. But they're not worth the $40-60 a month in union dues that is deducted straight from employee's paychecks.

Additionally, they are notoriously unethical. This state is a closed shop, meaning that at companies that have unions, all employees must join or be terminated, which IMO should be unlawful. Unions will fight tooth and nail to prevent their own secretaries and clerks from unionizing. It is much more difficult to de-certify a union than it is to vote one in. All it takes to bring in a union is 50% plus 1 of those that voted as there is no quorum required to certify the vote, so they'll wait until a facility shuts down and many people leave town to have their vote. They will only call certain individuals they know are pro union to advise them of a vote, and so on.

It used to be that one of the big benefits of belonging to a union was their pension plans. But pension plans are rapidly becoming a thing of the past, and have been a large reason why older, established companies like Ford and GM can't compete with foreign companies that make a similar or better product, like Toyota and Honda. If you buy a new Chevy, up to $1900 of the purchase price goes directly to their "legacy" costs...pensions and retiree health care. The Central States pension fund, once the crown jewel of the Teamster's union, is teetering on bankruptcy, and could leave tens of thousands of retirees without the income that they had counted on. As a worker, I would much rather have the money my company puts into a pension fund under my name contributed to a 401K.

Bottom line is that like you said, they are an outdated organization. They played an invaluable role in the first half of the 20th century in cleaning up unethical business practices, but those days are long gone.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 7232
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338


Return to Off Topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest