Some liberal democracies resisted this polarization. Democracy survived in Great Britain, the Netherlands, the U.S., etc. because the center held, and liberal values prevailed against the simplistic dogma and inflammatory hatreds of the left and right. Abandoning liberalism to combat the far right is not a winning tactic.
Boy you sure love to simplify history, eh?
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to rubecube For This Useful Post:
The Civil War *was* about states' rights - the right of the states to the institution of slavery. Similarly, these statues *are* historical remembrances - of the antebellum age where anyone white was superior to anyone black.
Neither statement legitimizes veneration of the past when complete and not deceptively shorn of their negative components. This technique of "true" but incomplete declarative statements is a favorite of ideologues of all kinds. The plain, simple truth should immediately arouse the deepest suspicion.
You can say that I guess but I think it just creates grey areas as people throw a bunch of other minor things into it when the major predominant reason was slavery, racism and white supremacy. It wasn't taxes or various other things.
I believe South Carolina succession reasoning included language that was actually in opposition of states being able to set their own laws. One of their big beefs was New York had set laws about transport of slaves within New York state such that people couldn't even travel with their slaves (not just transport to and from sale).
It was straight up slavery, racism and white supremacy.
I mean, no one explicitly used the words hero but these people don't deserve admiration that has been expressed for breaking the law and tying up the court system.
And I agree, Birth of a Nation came out in 1915 and the second iteration of the Klan occurred shortly after, so that factored in on some statues surely but they should be exmained case by case. There's worse examples of Confederate statues, there's one of Nathan Bedford Forrest in Tennessee that has no reason for existing.
I guess what I'm taking issue with is I care about the legality, if Durham had voted to get rid of that statue I'd be all for it. The standard of indiscriminately destroying any and all Confederate anything is a dangerous one. Also Minnie calling them schmucks isn't right, some poor 17 year old conscript from Virginia with no slaves getting his head blown off isn't my idea of a schmuck.
The Durham statue would have already been removed by now if not for a recently passed state law requiring state approval for the removal of any monument. The mayor of Durham and the NC Governor, both democrats, want the statue gone but the republican super majority in the state house has prevented any city from getting rid of statues. It's civil disobedience and understandable given all the gas Trump keeps throwing on the fire.
I guess what I'm taking issue with is I care about the legality, if Durham had voted to get rid of that statue I'd be all for it. The standard of indiscriminately destroying any and all Confederate anything is a dangerous one. Also Minnie calling them schmucks isn't right, some poor 17 year old conscript from Virginia with no slaves getting his head blown off isn't my idea of a schmuck.
This is a fairly great example of being unable to see the forest for the trees. Caring about the legality of it is nice, sure, but given all other information and what else happened over the weekend, that seems like a really stupid thing to care about. Charge them, don't, whatever. The legality of the event is a million miles down the list of thing to take out of this past weekend that you should care about.
And yes, calling them schmucks is fine. People die in war. Good people and bad people. There is a lot of truth to the fact that many Nazi soldiers in Germany weren't really given the choice or were quite young... but hey... we all still agree that nazis in general are scum, schmucks, #######s, idiots, etc. If you want to continue being unable to see the forest for the trees on that too, be my guest, but so far most of your arguments revolve around pointless, insignificant details and seem completely out of touch with a broad understanding of history or current events.
Lots of people are bringing up WW2 to counter fascism. But let's keep in mind what happened in the interwar period. Many countries polarized into the extreme right and the extreme left. Fascism and Communists. Fighting in the streets, gunning each other down, collapsing into civil war. Russia, Germany, Italy, Spain.
Some liberal democracies resisted this polarization. Democracy survived in Great Britain, the Netherlands, the U.S., etc. because the center held, and liberal values prevailed against the simplistic dogma and inflammatory hatreds of the left and right. Abandoning liberalism to combat the far right is not a winning tactic.
My Grandfather used to chuckle as he told me how he and his mates smashed up a Black shirt canteen in the east end of London back in the 1930's, the look of mirth on his face as he told me of throwing the tea urn down the stairs on top of the facists they'd thrown down the stairs first,
'oh how they howled when they got scalded with the tea urn!'
Still miss my Grandpa
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to afc wimbledon For This Useful Post:
This is a fairly great example of being unable to see the forest for the trees. Caring about the legality of it is nice, sure, but given all other information and what else happened over the weekend, that seems like a really stupid thing to care about. Charge them, don't, whatever. The legality of the event is a million miles down the list of thing to take out of this past weekend that you should care about.
And yes, calling them schmucks is fine. People die in war. Good people and bad people. There is a lot of truth to the fact that many Nazi soldiers in Germany weren't really given the choice or were quite young... but hey... we all still agree that nazis in general are scum, schmucks, #######s, idiots, etc. If you want to continue being unable to see the forest for the trees on that too, be my guest, but so far most of your arguments revolve around pointless, insignificant details and seem completely out of touch with a broad understanding of history or current events.
I "care" about it because there's not much to debate about neo-Nazis hitting people with their cars.
Broad understanding? Didn't you just thank a post accusing someone of always oversimplifying history?
The racism angle is easily understood, so I'll skip that.
The other part is simply regional pride. I think most people are proud of, or at least have some attachment to wherever we were born or grew up. If you're somewhere else and you run into someone from your hometown, it makes you happy and the two of you talk about things you have in common.
While the south seceded from the US and technically were traitors to the US, they were still citizens of those states. If you are today born in Virginia, you're a southerner. The confederates literally fought a war over being southerners. Yes, it was mostly about slavery, but regionalism was a factor as well. The vast majority of people who fought didn't own slaves. They fought because their home was at war.
Then you can add in the fact that the south has always been the poorer part of the country. Not as wealthy, fancy, or important as the north. If anything southern showed up on TV or in the movies, it was mostly likely being mocked. That creates a pretty deep sense of F-You to the rest of the country. Those roots run deep.
__________________
Watching the Oilers defend is like watching fire engines frantically rushing to the wrong fire
The Following User Says Thank You to GirlySports For This Useful Post:
People that don't know anything about the Civil War think it was about Slavery.
People who know a little bit about the Civil War think it was about States Rights.
Historians who study the Civil War think it was about Slavery.
The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to Flash Walken For This Useful Post:
Location: Wondering when # became hashtag and not a number sign.
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by longsuffering
No idea what I'm talking about? Maybe that's not surprising with your recent disclosure in the What Makes You Afraid thread and all but I guess I have to remind you that once you got past arguing that the white supremacists represented just a few bad apples, you suggested the best approach was for the world to poke it's collective heads in the sand and ignore White Nationalists and they'll go away.
If your advice is to not give any attention to the alt-right white nationalists, surely the same advice applies to dealing with counter protestors. Don't give them any attention and they'll stop doing it!
Does that clear things up for you?
Maybe you're talking about statues being removed in Raleigh/Durham, most posters are talking about the REAL issue - being white nationalism and the tolerance Trump, his advisors and supporters show them.
You really are pathetic.
The taking down of statues has happened in ONE locale by anyone in the public...that's Durham. That's it and that's all. Not my fault you can't follow a simple conversation though again it doesn't fir your simple model narrative so I am not surprised.
As for the rest if your not very subtle personal attack...hey if you get off on making fun of people's medical issues or you like to make fun of people who are aging....fill your boots sparky. I have thick skin and am able to handle it just fine. Are you ? I really doubt it.
So recognizing the distinctions between left, right, and liberal is simplification? You prefer the binary thinking of left vs right that dominates discourse today?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
A very interesting perspective of the issues of free speech, hate speech, the alt-right and the antifa movements, from someone in the middle of it all not too long ago.
So recognizing the distinctions between left, right, and liberal is simplification? You prefer the binary thinking of left vs right that dominates discourse today?
So recognizing the distinctions between left, right, and liberal is simplification?You prefer the binary thinking of left vs right that dominates discourse today?
Quote:
Originally Posted by rubecube
How is that even remotely what I said?
I found some minor similarities.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Hockeyguy15 For This Useful Post:
No idea what I'm talking about? Maybe that's not surprising with your recent disclosure in the What Makes You Afraid thread and all but I guess I have to remind you.
This is out of line, man. Calgarypuck has always had certain threads where people open because they feel the community is supportive and tight enough to do so.
I've had many disagreements with Tranny and we've even insulted each other in the moment, but to take someone's genuine fear of impending medical issues in a CP support thread and use it as a part of a burn in a political thread?
C'mon, that's bull****. Really disappointing.
The Following 29 Users Say Thank You to jayswin For This Useful Post:
You're assuming they won't be charged. They're not trying to obfuscate prosecution, they're actually doing the opposite. If they all admit they conspired to or took part in destruction of public property, it should make the prosecutor's job quite easy.
Not if they say they acted alone or in a small group. A defense lawyer would simply say "yes, my client confessed, but it could've been any one of these people who also confessed".
Not if they say they acted alone or in a small group. A defense lawyer would simply say "yes, my client confessed, but it could've been any one of these people who also confessed".
There were clearly a number of people involved in the incident, more than one person can be charged. We'll have to see how it plays out. There's no real point debating this hypothetical confession.
This is out of line, man. Calgarypuck has always had certain threads where people open because they feel the community is supportive and tight enough to do so.
I've had many disagreements with Tranny and we've even insulted each other in the moment, but to take someone's genuine fear of impending medical issues in a CP support thread and use it as a part of a burn in a political thread?
C'mon, that's bull****. Really disappointing.
Yeah to a point where I felt like reporting the post. (After some consideration.) To me that was just completely unacceptable.
There were clearly a number of people involved in the incident, more than one person can be charged. We'll have to see how it plays out. There's no real point debating this hypothetical confession.
But it appears that the number of confessions will outnumber the people who physically damaged the structure (or even feasily could have, if the crowd was sufficiently large enough - as it appears in the video I watched). And then there are resource allocation considerations.
