(05-28-2019 01:23 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(05-28-2019 01:09 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(05-28-2019 01:00 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  OO, you might want to read the replies again. Owl#s is the one who lobbed those word grenades at me...
But I'm glad you're taking Owl#s to task for making things personal, I did feel like calling me arrogant was a bit too far as well. Thanks for having my back!

Yes I did use those words. And I used them in a question of sorts, leaving it as either/or. And yes, I own them and I think them appropriate in that context. Presuming to know with certainty the intentions of people long dead strikes me as the height of either claimed omnipotence, or arrogance--which in that context are probably the same thing.

Ironically, you used those words when describing a projection you were making, based on my statements. Something that too seems to be a bit arrogant.
In the text you responded to, I laid out a few of the context clues that can fairly easily show why some statues, and in that specific case, the Jefferson Davis memorial, were not erected to honor fallen soldiers or the like, but to either celebrate the Confederacy (in Jefferson's case), or worse, intimidate.
Does this mean that anytime someone uses contextual clues to evaluate the rationale behind an action they are being arrogant?

I was making a projection based on your statements? How so?

As far as context clues, they are valuable as context clues. But to extrapolate context clues into an absolute statement about te motivations of people who ave been dead for 100 years or thereabouts strikes me as the height of self-claimed omnipotence or arrogance or both. Sorry if the offends.

And you overlooked some pretty serious context clues. The South was pretty badly treated during Reconstruction. If you want to compare the actions of Southerners to Germans or Japanese post-WWII, it might be a useful starting point to compare Reconstruction to the Marshall Plan or to MacArthur's handling of Japan. The result was a tremendous amount of deep-seated resentment among Southerners, a good bit of which was justified. That was a huge motivation behind many of the Confederate memorials--along the lines of, "they can screw us but they can't stop us from remembering." It's pretty much generally accepted that Reconstruction set the South back decades economically. It's catching up now, but that resentment still has carry-over aspects. The cultural importance of NASCAR and SEC football come to mind. Question, do you think the treatment of the South during Reconstruction was appropriate? Do you think any resentment over that treatment was unjustified?