re: University of Alabama system to review all building names, remove Confederate Army plaques

quote:

---

So not sure where you got that regarding state rights were not what was being sold to the people in the south.

---

Well, I think the war propaganda posters are a completely different thing. I was talking more of using the state's rights argument as a pretext for secession, which lead to the war. Certainly the Confederate leaders played up the "northern invasion" angle to get volunteers to defend their state. The states rights argument as a pretext for secession didn't really come about until the early 1900's, and was promulgated by the Daughters Of the Confederacy, mainly.

Now, I can look back and admit the slavery issue was a states rights issue. But I think slavery was THE sole reason for secession, and bringing up states rights is an effort to obfuscate that fact.

quote:

---

Well, I think the war propaganda posters are a completely different thing. I was talking more of using the state's rights argument as a pretext for secession, which lead to the war. Certainly the Confederate leaders played up the "northern invasion" angle to get volunteers to defend their state. The states rights argument as a pretext for secession didn't really come about until the early 1900's, and was promulgated by the Daughters Of the Confederacy, mainly.

Now, I can look back and admit the slavery issue was a states rights issue. But I think slavery was THE sole reason for secession, and bringing up states rights is an effort to obfuscate that fact.

---

I agree but also believe reconstruction is the main reason for the issues of racism we deal with today.

quote:

---

Funny/sad thing is that slavery would have ended very soon anyhow. Even without international pressure (which was going to get stronger and stronger), the simple fact was that the modern technology that was rapidly arriving could do most of the same jobs better and faster than people.

---

It's possible, but on what timeline? The industrial revolution started soon after the Civil War. It's more likely they would have just shifted that slave labor to the factories and construction.

quote:

---

Covering up history doesn't make it go away. This action builds on the "systemic racism" claim, both of which are ploys to depersonalize white people, much the same way the Nazis sought to depersonalized the Jews.

---

This is hyperbole. Nobody is attempting to cover up history by removing monuments from taxpayer funded entities. The history can be documented in other means, and it is very important to tell the WHOLE American story.

And systemic racism doesn't depersonalize whites. It simply implicates the ones who were instrumental in constructing and maintaining systems that impede the liberties of Black Americans. Major difference.

As we've seen this week, White people can and should stand up in favor of liberties of Black people. Because if freedoms can be eroded from Black people, they can also be for everyone else.

In the words of Fannie Lou Hamer, "nobody is free until we are all free."

quote:

---

I agree but also believe reconstruction is the main reason for the issues of racism we deal with today.

---

I'm not sure how different approaches to Reconstruction would have achieved any degree of racial harmony, or at least set the South on a course to achieve it. White Southerners were suddenly being asked to hold as equals the people they had, for generations, seen as property. Any measures, no matter how benign, enacted to advance civil rights and equality for former slaves were bound to be fiercely resisted. The war was the point of no return as far as race relations in the South went. Reconstruction was always doomed to fail because of that.

quote:

---

This is hyperbole. Nobody is attempting to cover up history by removing monuments from taxpayer funded entities.

---

You're very wrong about this.

quote:

---

As we've seen this week, White people can and should stand up in favor of liberties of Black people. Because if freedoms can be eroded from Black people, they can also be for everyone else.

---

We are witnessing freedoms being eroded under the guise of standing up for black people.

quote:

---

I'm not sure how different approaches to Reconstruction would have achieved any degree of racial harmony, or at least set the South on a course to achieve it. White Southerners were suddenly being asked to hold as equals the people they had, for generations, seen as property. Any measures, no matter how benign, enacted to advance civil rights and equality for former slaves were bound to be fiercely resisted. The war was the point of no return as far as race relations in the South went. Reconstruction was always doomed to fail because of that.

---

Yes equality following under the 13th amendment but that was not what brought on so much hatred as what the 14th amendment did, especially section 2 & 3 of the amendment.

Understand at this time only white males had the right to vote. This amendment was adopted prior to black males getting the right to vote and the 14th was the reason the KKK was organized to go after white voters and whites running for office that supported the north during reconstruction.

The 14th amendment change how voting and running for office was handled. If the government determined that you fought for the south or supported the south you could not run for office. Basically no different how that was implemented then the McCarthy Hearings where the government could determine anyone a communist. This was important because the 14th amendment changed that only legal white males could vote. If you fought for or supported the secession you were no longer legally allowed to vote.

Now compound that on how officials were elected to congress. Senators were appointed to Congress via the state legislators at that time. Representatives were voted on by legal voters and the number per state was based on population. But the 14th amendment changed that to based on the number of legal voters in that state. Which at the time was only white male voters who the majority of in the south had lost the legal right to vote. So came the carpetbaggers from the north along with the few that supported the north during the war and they were the only ones allowed to vote and run for office in the south. It not only limited the number of representatives for each state but gave overwhelming power to the north.

Again this was prior to black males getting the right to vote. This was not a race issue at the start of reconstruction but do to apportionment of representation in the house, who could hold office, and the citizenship clause. You want change for one side you can not take away from another side and limit their ability for the same rights. That is not equality by any means.

Reconstruction was set out to punish the south not reconstruct and unite. It created more fears then it should have and once the 3 reconstruction amendments were all out it created an underlying dark path that lead to major race issues we are dealing with today.

Now would any approach work better, probably not. I understand we needed to change and create equality but the manner it was done helped create a deeper divide for future race relations met with even greater resistance for change that we are still dealing with 160 years later.

quote:

---

Nobody loses freedoms through police reform. If anything, we likely gain freedoms.

---

You keep telling yourself that. Maybe we'll gain some freedoms from "the man." Mob rule will be much worse.

quote:

---

All the recruitment posters

---

This is something that gets brushed over quite frequently. The message spun to the masses wasn’t exactly “hey they are coming for the slaves, mount up”. It was shaped as an attack on their way of life and their property. Something I was told in ten Hoor was, “ what would you do to protect your way of life?”. Look how this same idea brainwashed Nazi Germany to the point of absolute suicide. Once the people are convinced they are right they will fight for every ounce of it.

Great discussion by the way folks!