tanqtonic
Hall of Famer
Posts: 19,140
Joined: Nov 2016
Reputation: 775
I Root For: rice
Location: |
RE: Response to the killing of George Floyd
(07-05-2020 06:36 PM)Rice93 Wrote: (07-05-2020 06:26 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: (07-05-2020 03:09 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: (07-05-2020 01:04 PM)georgewebb Wrote: (07-05-2020 11:05 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote: Why do conservatives feel that memorials to confederate war heroes are a conservative issue to fight for? What about the honoring people who fought to secede from the United States makes conservatives want to support that? If you view moving these statues to a museum as something you’re giving up, you must logically find that this is something conservatives don’t want to do.
This is about statues honoring Confederates, not historical markers/buildings which rightfully should stand as a way to teach (similar to how moving these statues to museums is a very appropriate action).
Lad, I'm the most anti-Confederate person you'll ever meet. I was anti-Confederate in third grade, at an age when most of you probably weren't even sure how many stars are in the flag. I don't think the United States should celebrate any American who took up arms against the United States -- not in a statue, a public building, a street, or anywhere. I have not said a single thing defending the existence or placement of such statues, much less have I "fought for" them. So please don't tar me with that brush.
What I did was gently chide Rice93 that his attitude of "if people would just do it my way, then violence wouldn't be needed" is not much different from the defenses offered by murderous cops, wife beaters (as Tanq noted), terrorists, and other practicers of lawlessness. It is a smug, self-centered, self-righteous, immature, anti-democratic, and ultimately lazy attitude, and he should be chided for it. Even if he himself is too dense to recognize it, I'm sure that you're not.
My comment was explicitly geared towards Owl#s comment about this being a compromise where each side (liberal and conservative) needing to give up something “in return.”
If this is a bipartisan issue, why are there sides needing to compromise? It seems like we don’t need sides to give things up in return, since we all agree that these monuments should be taken down. We are apparently moving too slowly via legislative avenues, and an unruly populace is taking matters into their own hands.
"since we all agree that these monuments should be taken down."
I see the patented lad filter and generalities have kicked on.
I see zero need for most, if not all, the monuments to 'be taken down'. But, considering I have ancestors that actually died on that battlefield, I am sure you feel zero compunction about pissing on their graves as a general matter. Good for you.
I mean, there are some that seemingly take the German tack w/r to their rrcent history in that pretty much all reference to anything to a point in history be airbrushed. You can march in that lane, dont take me there by default.
And no, I will short circuit the 'racist' comment. I actually have a heckuva lot of respect for my ancestors that fought for their land. And no, we shouldnt demean that. The vast, vast majority of men who fought for the South did not own slaves, they fought for their state. I am not going to take a dump on them blindly and sua sponte like you proffer above.
This reminds me of those years of my schooling that were spent in the South. We learned that the Civil War was fought over state rights and that slavery was not a big driver when it came to the reasons for the South fighting.
Slavery was a big thing in the mix, if not the biggest. It was not the only thing. It was not the only major thing. To insinuate that it was the only major thing would be as ignorant as insinuating or stating that it was 'not a big driver'.
If you want to be very specific, the *reason* for the *fighting* was specifically over state's rights, and in particular over state ownership of Federal forts in their domain. That specific issue and sub-issue was absolutely the spark that set the *fighting* off.
The specific issues that culminated in the state's secessions were different than the sparkplugs for *fighting*.
The three biggest reasons that culminated in the War were: a) state abilities to secede (an open question from the original Articles of Confederacy *and* the Constitution, and had fulminated openly since the mid 1810's); b) the question of whether slavery could be continued into the new West, and the resulting political mismatch that the Compromise guaranteed for the South; and c) the really harsh import/export/tariff/taxation regime that the North imposed at the expense of the economies of the Southern states starting in the mid 1820's and continuing to the start of the wave of secessions -- some of it rooted indirectly in the slavery question.
The political and economic livability of the South, and the hotbed of anti-Federalism, were being systematically extinguished -- including the very major issue of slavery, but with a whole host of other economic and political facets in that mix. In litigation, there is a maxim, if what you want to do is start a fight to the death, then offer no way out. But be prepared for a very bloody result when someone is cornered. The South was faced with extinction as a political entity, and they did the most logical thing left -- they pulled the trigger on the fail safe. And that question of Federalism, along with the underlying up or down on slavery, that the Founding Fathers did not address because of the fear of addressing it at the start, was thus decided by the age old method of arms -- 4 years of a very bloody insurrection.
Quote:How do you feel about "taking a dump" on living black people who walk by these monuments that were originally placed in their neighborhoods as an intimidation tactic by white supremacists?
I have zero issue with the removal of such statutes placed as intimidation. But that isnt the question at hand, is it? So kindly move away from the questions rooted solely in rhetoric, if you could.
This goes hand in hand with the issue of the 'bargain' put forth by #s.
I have zero issue with the removal of the signs of ignorance from instigated by white supremacists for the issue of 'intimidation' -- up to and including the 'dozens' so mentioned. I certainly and absolutely would trade those symbols of ignorance for a reduction of the current day ignorance exhibited from your side. In a heartbeat.
(This post was last modified: 07-05-2020 08:17 PM by tanqtonic.)
|
|
/
Response to the killing of George Floyd
