Charlottesville riots

[ShockingButTrue]

No way! That would be like believing MSM claims that Trump actually made statements supporting the white supremacists after the Charlottesville riots.

Reckless and Inflammatory. Trump condemns hatred on all sides and gets dumped on even more.

If my neighbor hates me because I'm a Shocker fan (he's a Chicken fan) to the point of wishing my car would blow up, but that's as far as he would go with it, other than being an ignorant dummy, would that make him a bad person? Can't he have the right to hate me? Bearing no harm upon another he can think anything he wants to think.

I'm hearing a radically different national debate/psychology.

[ShockCrazy]

Reckless and Inflammatory. Trump condemns hatred on all sides and gets dumped on even more.

If my neighbor hates me because I'm a Shocker fan (he's a Chicken fan) to the point of wishing my car would blow up, but that's as far as he would go with it, other than being an ignorant dummy, would that make him a bad person? Can't he have the right to hate me? Bearing no harm upon another he can think anything he wants to think.

I'm hearing a radically different national debate/psychology.

See the thing you are missing is that white supremacists don't want it to stay as just a thought. They want policy changes to support their hatred, otherwise why would they protest? Why would they be violent themselves, or prepare for violence? Couldn't they have easily just shown up and peaceably spewed hate and let the people on the other side start things?

[ShockingButTrue]

See the thing you are missing is that white supremacists don't want it to stay as just a thought. They want policy changes to support their hatred, otherwise why would they protest? Why would they be violent themselves, or prepare for violence? Couldn't they have easily just shown up and peaceably spewed hate and let the people on the other side start things?

You veered totally from my point.

[pinstripers]

https://scontent-dft4-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/20882000_901319766690079_4474324647806446079_n.jpg?oh=5935e8215ede8aee45291377dd31b860&oe=5A2DD34B

I know this is gonna rile some up, but the guy I stole it from is one of my black friends, so to hell with it.

[wufan]

https://scontent-dft4-2.xx.fbcdn.net...60&oe=5A2DD34B

I know this is gonna rile some up, but the guy I stole it from is one of my black friends, so to hell with it.

It was a Saturday.

[wufan]

See the thing you are missing is that white supremacists don't want it to stay as just a thought. They want policy changes to support their hatred, otherwise why would they protest? Why would they be violent themselves, or prepare for violence? Couldn't they have easily just shown up and peaceably spewed hate and let the people on the other side start things?

I am totally okay with dumbasses thinking dumb things. I'm totally okay with dimbasses saying dumb things. There's an opportunity in that to educate those that are naive. I'm not okay with violence.

[Aargh]

[SB Shock]

What I Saw in Charlottesville and What We All Lost

https://warontherocks.com/2017/08/what-i-saw-in-charlottesville-and-what-we-all-lost/

I must be clear that I draw no moral equivalency between the two sides in Charlottesville. One stands for hatred and the other against. My wife and I know what side we will always be on.


The promise of democracy is not that it will always select good and honest leaders or that it will always make just and fair laws, but rather that people can seek change free of fear and violence by the state or their fellow citizens. This must be preserved. If incidents like this are allowed to continue and escalate, as I often saw in the Southern Hemisphere, people will look to the military to relieve the overwhelmed police. When the praetorians seize power, restoration of public order is almost always a proximate cause. We can’t let that happen here.


Dr. King taught us all that violence and hate are most effectively countered with non-violence and love. Sadly, we may need to re-learn that lesson.

[CBB_Fan]

I did a little research on the topic of Confederate statues to try to come to an informed decision.

Most of these statues were not built immediately after the Civil War, or by people that fought in the war or lived during the time of the war. They were built largely during the 50-year and 100-year anniversaries of the war, more the former than the latter.

The group that will pop up again and again when you look into the statues is the Daughters of the Confederacy, which wasn't founded until 1894. During the early 20th century the Daughters of the Confederacy began a massive lobbying and advocacy movement. They renamed highways, created museums, compiling archives, interviewing soldiers, writing history textbooks, and erecting many monuments.

And despite the name, they were not limited to the South. They were a women's group popular wherever Southeners had moved to. When women in Arizona or Montana found a common bond in their Southern ancestry, they joined the Daughters of the Confederacy and put up monuments honoring their ancestors, which is why you have Civil War monuments in places all across the country.

The Daughters of the Confederacy were part of the Lost Cause movement, which sought to glorify the Confederacy as a noble effort to preserve the Southern way of life that lost only because the North had more resources. The other aspect of this movement was minimizing or outright denying the role slavery had in the Civil War, and promoting the idea that slavery was a benevolent institution that bettered the lives of Africans by bringing them to civilization.

The Lost Cause movement varied greatly in scope. At the extreme end, it included the Birth of the Nation (beloved by Woodrow Wilson), though Gone with the Wind is more moderate film. David W. Blight wrote the following about the Birth of a Nation:

Dixon's vicious version of the idea that blacks had caused the Civil War by their very presence, and that Northern radicalism during Reconstruction failed to understand that freedom had ushered blacks as a race into barbarism, neatly framed the story of the rise of heroic vigilantism in the South. Reluctantly, Klansmen – white men – had to take the law into their own hands in order to save Southern white womanhood from the sexual brutality of black men. Dixon's vision captured the attitude of thousands and forged in story form a collective memory of how the war may have been lost but Reconstruction was won – by the South and a reconciled nation. Riding as masked cavalry, the Klan stopped corrupt government, prevented the anarchy of 'Negro rule,' and most of all, saved white supremacy.

That gives you some idea of the ideology of those that raised the statues. But if you doubt the motives of the Daughters of the Confederacy, you can read what they themselves had to say at the time.

In that document, they explain that the cause of the secession was the North's "unmitigated abuse of the South." But the more important bit is below:

No. Slavery existed previous to the Constitution, and the Union was formed in spite of it. Both from the standpoint of the Constitution and sound statesmanship it was not slavery, but the vindictive, intemperate antislavery movement that was at the bottom of all the troubles." [emphasis mine]

That is the ideology behind the raising of the statues, an ideology that gave birth to the revitalized KKK, an ideology that holds that non-white Americans do not deserve freedom or basic rights. The people that wrote the Catachism and erected these monuments believed that if it weren't for abolitionists America would be a better place.

If the monuments stand for anything, they stand for that ideology, not a historical account of the Civil War. Without context, they serve only to fulfill their original purpose: to glorify the myth of the Noble South and dismiss the wrongs of both the Confederacy and institutions that followed it.

[atlwsu]

I did a little research on the topic of Confederate statues to try to come to an informed decision.

Most of these statues were not built immediately after the Civil War, or by people that fought in the war or lived during the time of the war. They were built largely during the 50-year and 100-year anniversaries of the war, more the former than the latter.

The group that will pop up again and again when you look into the statues is the Daughters of the Confederacy, which wasn't founded until 1894. During the early 20th century the Daughters of the Confederacy began a massive lobbying and advocacy movement. They renamed highways, created museums, compiling archives, interviewing soldiers, writing history textbooks, and erecting many monuments.

And despite the name, they were not limited to the South. They were a women's group popular wherever Southeners had moved to. When women in Arizona or Montana found a common bond in their Southern ancestry, they joined the Daughters of the Confederacy and put up monuments honoring their ancestors, which is why you have Civil War monuments in places all across the country.

The Daughters of the Confederacy were part of the Lost Cause movement, which sought to glorify the Confederacy as a noble effort to preserve the Southern way of life that lost only because the North had more resources. The other aspect of this movement was minimizing or outright denying the role slavery had in the Civil War, and promoting the idea that slavery was a benevolent institution that bettered the lives of Africans by bringing them to civilization.

The Lost Cause movement varied greatly in scope. At the extreme end, it included the Birth of the Nation (beloved by Woodrow Wilson), though Gone with the Wind is more moderate film. David W. Blight wrote the following about the Birth of a Nation:



That gives you some idea of the ideology of those that raised the statues. But if you doubt the motives of the Daughters of the Confederacy, you can read what they themselves had to say at the time.

In that document, they explain that the cause of the secession was the North's "unmitigated abuse of the South." But the more important bit is below:



That is the ideology behind the raising of the statues, an ideology that gave birth to the revitalized KKK, an ideology that holds that non-white Americans do not deserve freedom or basic rights. The people that wrote the Catachism and erected these monuments believed that if it weren't for abolitionists America would be a better place.

If the monuments stand for anything, they stand for that ideology, not a historical account of the Civil War. Without context, they serve only to fulfill their original purpose: to glorify the myth of the Noble South and dismiss the wrongs of both the Confederacy and institutions that followed it.

Best post in this entire thread

Thanks

[shockmonster]

I'm good with the statues coming down that are statues based on the Civil War. I've stated before that the states should be the one to take them down. However, the history of the Civil
War should be kept in museums, etc. The Federal Government needs to stay out of it. If leadership doesn't handle this issue correctly, the ballot box is where it should be
settled in a democratic government.

Another aspect that I've heard is that some people want to take down the monuments, and statues that have nothing to do with the Civil War, but are American leaders who
owned slaves themselves (Washington, Jefferson, Others), but were leaders of American history such as the Revolutionary War. I don't think that there is a large group of
people supporting this issue and I hope that this debate doesn't continue to move in that direction, because, it will further divide our country.

[WuDrWu]

I'm just curious, and this is for all those out there that completely disagree with me, so basically most of you, but I'm curious....

1) How long does white America (not my term) have to pay for the sins of slave owners? Or how much? Perhaps if there is an answer, we can pay it and move forward as a country? I'm serious. How long do good and decent people (not hate filled criminals that still hurt others...I'm talking about folks that live their lives that all people are created equal, even if they don't all end up having equal) have to pay for the sins of their great, great, great (and further back) grandparents, or just people of their same color if they have no relation?

2) It's often said children aren't born racist and they aren't born with hate in their hearts. Does that work both ways, or only with white children?


I don't know anyone that knows anyone that was a slave. I doubt anyone here does either. It stands to pass that anyone born today doesn't know anything about slavery. I also don't question, AT ALL, that there are inequities in this country. We aren't perfect. But WE aren't perfect. I don't think WE includes only white people. We can't even have a discussion about all the problems with minorities that have NOTHING to do with evil white people. And these problems are FAR more damaging to people than the KKK, neo Nazis or the alt right (whatever the hell that is). And if you don't think so, then you're never going to and there is little hope, for all of us.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

1) How long does white America (not my term) have to pay for the sins of slave owners? Or how much? Perhaps if there is an answer, we can pay it and move forward as a country? I'm serious. How long do good and decent people (not hate filled criminals that still hurt others...I'm talking about folks that live their lives that all people are created equal, even if they don't all end up having equal) have to pay for the sins of their great, great, great (and further back) grandparents, or just people of their same color if they have no relation?

You have to be more specific. In what way are you being forced to "pay" for the sins of others? Not saying you are or aren't, but I can't comment without knowing specifically how you think you are currently "paying".

[pinstripers]

Terry McAuliffe, who is not only the biggest jackass in Virginia, but also the governor, has called for all historic statues to be torn down in his state. Actually, he has been governor for several years, and they haven't bothered him a bit, but now that he can gain some publicity........

[WuShock16]

I'm just curious, and this is for all those out there that completely disagree with me, so basically most of you, but I'm curious....

1) How long does white America (not my term) have to pay for the sins of slave owners? Or how much? Perhaps if there is an answer, we can pay it and move forward as a country? I'm serious. How long do good and decent people (not hate filled criminals that still hurt others...I'm talking about folks that live their lives that all people are created equal, even if they don't all end up having equal) have to pay for the sins of their great, great, great (and further back) grandparents, or just people of their same color if they have no relation?

2) It's often said children aren't born racist and they aren't born with hate in their hearts. Does that work both ways, or only with white children?


I don't know anyone that knows anyone that was a slave. I doubt anyone here does either. It stands to pass that anyone born today doesn't know anything about slavery. I also don't question, AT ALL, that there are inequities in this country. We aren't perfect. But WE aren't perfect. I don't think WE includes only white people. We can't even have a discussion about all the problems with minorities that have NOTHING to do with evil white people. And these problems are FAR more damaging to people than the KKK, neo Nazis or the alt right (whatever the hell that is). And if you don't think so, then you're never going to and there is little hope, for all of us.

We've had many discussions over this concept, and you might be surprised to know that I don't completely disagree with you.

Living in Kansas, I have had more direct exposure of fringe-right but over the last couple of years came in contact with someone who is probably fringe-left. In my interactions with this person, I would hear all about how people who I know and care about are "white supremacists." Now, these particular people are certainly strongly conservative in beliefs...BUT WHITE SUPREMACISTS??? I hardly think so. My two complaints with this person were:

-For as much as he wanted to complain about white privilege, he seemed to ignore problems with his own MALE privilege. He would routinely dismiss and ignore very capable women in his office. Part of that is his culture, which is highly male-dominated...but in my opinion, you can take your complaints about white privilege and shove it if you don't want to address the fact that you are a chauvinist.
-(To your first point) I always wanted to ask him what the answer was to his problem but he never had one. I understand that decades and even centuries of injustice aren't easily forgotten or summarized, but at some point, we have to find some sort of a solution and move on. If you are going to be pissed for the sake of being pissed, I cannot help you much.

I've probably said this before, but I'll say it again. If we want true unity in this country, we have to have more self-policing. It needs to be the left-leaning people in Missouri leading the charge of demanding that the woman resign after calling for Trump's assassination. It has to be right-leaning people leading to charge to tell Trump to seriously STFU on Twitter. When we cross the center line in our white-hot criticism, we hear, "Your side does this---Yeah, but your side does that---yeah, but your side also does this---yeah, but your side also does that" and we get absolutely nowhere.

I'll say this about Doc. At the core, there are differences in our opinions on things. However, when we've discussed those things in our interactions, he has always been respectful about it. He'll jokingly give me crap about certain things. He will be very passionate when he tells me why he thinks the way he does. However, he is understanding of where I come from on things...never rude or totally dismissive. He might counter with something that makes me have to dig deep to strengthen my opinion, but he is respectful about it. I do appreciate that. His approach with me works a lot better than the previous person I mentioned.