Started By
Message
re: Stone Mountain facade
Posted on 7/8/20 at 8:18 pm to Lucius Clay
Posted on 7/8/20 at 8:18 pm to Lucius Clay
quote:
Not so sure about this. In the America of the 1860s, people tended to identify very strongly with their state. Southerners in areas economically reliant on slavery were certainly not keen on going along with what they perceived as imposition of northern abolitionism. Definitely not the landowners.
^^^This. We were much more like Europe than what we recognize today as USA. Southerners fought because war was brought to their state. The vast majority of those who volunteered to fight and died did not, and would never, own slaves.
Posted on 7/9/20 at 5:43 pm to WorkinDawg
quote:
The vast majority of those who volunteered to fight and died did not, and would never, own slaves.
True. But I'm willing to bet that 99% of them sure didn't like the idea of black folks being citizens and worst of all, being allowed to vote.
Hence all the efforts they expended for about 60 years AFTER the war to try to prevent black folks from voting....
Coincidentally...a fun fact: The vast majority of statues to Confederacy went up between 1890 and 1930. Purpose: Foster the new myth of Southern heritage (that the war wasn't about slavery) while at the same time, symbolize white supremacy during the height of the Jim Crow efforts.
Posted on 7/9/20 at 8:43 pm to Lucius Clay
quote:
But I'm willing to bet that 99% of them sure didn't like the idea of black folks being citizens and worst of all, being allowed to vote.
Same for the 99% of those who fought for the Union.
Erase everything!
Posted on 7/10/20 at 4:05 pm to Lucius Clay
quote:
Coincidentally...a fun fact: The vast majority of statues to Confederacy went up between 1890 and 1930. Purpose: Foster the new myth of Southern heritage (that the war wasn't about slavery) while at the same time, symbolize white supremacy during the height of the Jim Crow efforts.
Most of these monuments were put up about 30-50 years after the war as the veterans were getting old. The monuments honored their war dead. The same thing happened in the Union states, monuments were put up to honor their war dead. I have seen numerous monuments and I have yet to see a political position expressed on one. They are about their war dead. Union monuments and Confederate monuments both look very similiar,
Posted on 7/10/20 at 11:08 pm to deeprig9
quote:
Same for the 99% of those who fought for the Union.
Perhaps. But at least they were on the right side of history.
Posted on 7/10/20 at 11:32 pm to bunkerhill
quote:
They are about their war dead.
That's a nice story but that period also happened to coincide with Jim Crow, the resurgence of the Klan, and the creation of the myth of the "Lost Cause of the Confederacy."
Read up on the United Daughters of the Confederacy... They sponsored hundreds of Confederate memorials from 1880 well into the 1940s, and it wasn't just about memorializing the dead and helping children of veterans. The UDC were big into screening history textbooks, attempting to prevent school districts from adopting those that claimed the Civil War was about slavery. The goal was to romanticize the "Old South" and rationalize segregation. In the early 1900s, the UDC was overtly supportive of the Klan and continued to be until the mid 1930s. You can easily find their literature from that period.
Inconvenient truths but they are what they are... The agenda of those who put up many of these monuments was thinly veiled at best.
Posted on 7/11/20 at 9:19 am to Lucius Clay
quote:
Read up on the United Daughters of the Confederacy.
What year was this written, just curious.
I dont doubt you. But there seems to be a lot of rewriting of history. 1618 and all.
Posted on 7/11/20 at 10:07 am to Lucius Clay
What is curiously ignored when discussing the Confederate States of America is that every state voluntarily joined what became the United States. Yet when some of those states chose to voluntarily withdraw from the United States, the other states attacked them and forced them back into the United States.
Posted on 7/11/20 at 7:16 pm to meansonny
quote:
But there seems to be a lot of rewriting of history.
This isn't new information. I remember reading about efforts of the UDC and other groups as a freshman in college...and that was a LONG time ago... (yeah kind of a history buff for kicks).
I think this stuff is just getting "rediscovered" by a lot of people.
Posted on 7/11/20 at 7:20 pm to AlaCowboy
quote:
when some of those states chose to voluntarily withdraw from the United States, the other states attacked them and forced them back into the United States.
Can't argue with that. But those states had signed and ratified the Constitution 75 years prior. The Constitution isn't a contract with an exit clause. Should we have just broken up into two countries so one could continue with slavery?
Posted on 7/11/20 at 10:03 pm to Lucius Clay
quote:
Can't argue with that. But those states had signed and ratified the Constitution 75 years prior. The Constitution isn't a contract with an exit clause. Should we have just broken up into two countries so one could continue with slavery?
We should do that now ... except the slavery part. This country is a bad marriage where the two sides dont trust each other and don't listen to each other. There is no honest attempt to find solutions. Only yelling and screaming at the other side while the people in power continue to enrich themselves. Ain't it grand.
This post was edited on 7/11/20 at 10:05 pm
Posted on 7/12/20 at 12:23 am to MacDawg
Crazy how real that comment is
There is literally no conversation to be had that doesnt involve crying, blame, dramatization, lies, politically driven bullshite. Theres no middle ground. Nobody wants middle ground
States are aggressively trying to reinforce that whites should stand down. That there will be consequences to resistance. Look no further than Ga. Mayors of every metro shithole trying to repeal "Stand Your Ground" because it disproportionately affects the roaches out here robbing and attacking
I've never met most of you in real life. But I think better of you than some trash with 3 baby mamas harassing you at the foot of stone mtn on the 4th of July about reparations
There is literally no conversation to be had that doesnt involve crying, blame, dramatization, lies, politically driven bullshite. Theres no middle ground. Nobody wants middle ground
States are aggressively trying to reinforce that whites should stand down. That there will be consequences to resistance. Look no further than Ga. Mayors of every metro shithole trying to repeal "Stand Your Ground" because it disproportionately affects the roaches out here robbing and attacking
I've never met most of you in real life. But I think better of you than some trash with 3 baby mamas harassing you at the foot of stone mtn on the 4th of July about reparations
Posted on 7/12/20 at 12:42 pm to Lucius Clay
quote:
Can't argue with that. But those states had signed and ratified the Constitution 75 years prior. The Constitution isn't a contract with an exit clause. Should we have just broken up into two countries so one could continue with slavery?
The Constitution has been amended many times to reflect changes in this country. In fact, the Constitution included provisions for slavery in this nation but was later amended to prohibit it. Leaders in the Southern states knew that slavery would likely be ending in the near future due to industrial progress.
As for breaking up into two countries, that is exactly what was done in 1861, until one country invaded the new country and eventually forcefully took possession of the other one.
Posted on 7/12/20 at 3:01 pm to MacDawg
quote:
the two sides
This concept has been created and promoted by politicians and the media for their own enrichment for generations but it's been worsened in the Internet age. The political class and the media directly profit from conflict and have strong incentive to push polarization.
Sadly, though, if carried to the extreme conclusion - two countries - the results may not be good for either. Both could be weaker.
Posted on 7/12/20 at 7:25 pm to AlaCowboy
quote:
As for breaking up into two countries, that is exactly what was done in 1861, until one country invaded the new country and eventually forcefully took possession of the other one.
You glossed over the fact that the Constitution does not allow states or groups of states to leave and form their own country. Those who signed were signing on to form a "perpetual Union" with a new federal government that is above the states. As I said, the Constitution does not mention or even imply a right to drop out just because your state or its leaders doesn't like federal laws or policies.
You can always revolt (as the Colonies themselves did) against England but it will be (and was) considered treason. You're only recourse is to win the rebellion and I suppose you can then declare yourself an independent nation.
Posted on 7/13/20 at 10:18 am to Lucius Clay
quote:
You glossed over the fact that the Constitution does not allow states or groups of states to leave and form their own country.
You glossed over the fact that the Constitution has been amended many times to reflect change in the national psyche. As I stated, the Constitution initially accepted slavery but was amended to eliminate it. Are you saying the Constitution should never have been amended? This can be an interesting debate topic if we can keep emotions out of it.
Posted on 7/13/20 at 10:59 am to Lucius Clay
(no message)
This post was edited on 7/15/20 at 9:24 pm
Posted on 7/13/20 at 11:40 am to WorkinDawg
Its got to go. Rename the place to Stoned Mountain and alter images to show Ken Kesey, Hunter Thompson, Willie Nelson and Timothy Leary.
Posted on 7/13/20 at 4:27 pm to Lucius Clay
The monuments were still about honoring their war dead. Every little town and village in Germany has memorials to their war dead of WWI and WWII. I have never seen one that glorified Hitler or the Kaiser.
At the time of Secession things were so bad that the Southern States just wanted out. Like an abused spouse they had had enough of tariffs and being blocked at expanding slavery to the Western territories. Some slaveholders at the time felt the best way to keep slavery legal was to stay in the union. It takes 3/4 of the states to ratify an amendment to the constitution.
Two things the framers of the US Constitution did not address - slavery and secession. A huge error, imo.
There is today the tendency to view things of 160 years ago through 2020 eyes. That is an error on many levels. There is also a tendency to rewrite history to make it conform to what people WANT it to be, today.
At the time of Secession things were so bad that the Southern States just wanted out. Like an abused spouse they had had enough of tariffs and being blocked at expanding slavery to the Western territories. Some slaveholders at the time felt the best way to keep slavery legal was to stay in the union. It takes 3/4 of the states to ratify an amendment to the constitution.
Two things the framers of the US Constitution did not address - slavery and secession. A huge error, imo.
There is today the tendency to view things of 160 years ago through 2020 eyes. That is an error on many levels. There is also a tendency to rewrite history to make it conform to what people WANT it to be, today.
Posted on 7/13/20 at 4:42 pm to bunkerhill
Slavery was addressed in the constitution. It banned the international slave trade after 20 years.
It was a compromise that has been argued to be one of the reasons why the constitution was ratified.
Slavery is the great sin of many nations. However its inclusion is one of the reasons why the 13 colonies came together as a country.
Having the constitution include a secession plan sounds like a colossal failure. Maybe you have read up more on the 18th century arguments of the day. But I'm not aware of any.
It was a compromise that has been argued to be one of the reasons why the constitution was ratified.
Slavery is the great sin of many nations. However its inclusion is one of the reasons why the 13 colonies came together as a country.
Having the constitution include a secession plan sounds like a colossal failure. Maybe you have read up more on the 18th century arguments of the day. But I'm not aware of any.
Latest Georgia News
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News