Why is educating about Tubman bad?

Phantasmal said:
That’s not the disagreement Dutch, neither of us wants to bury the past.

You just think the statues preserve the past. I think they pervert it. The traitor and losers aren’t to be honored as heroes. They declared war on this country. They don’t deserve monuments to honor them.
Click to expand...

I have to agree with that. Keep them in a museum or sell them to a private party, but get them off of govt. property. We can teach history without their images.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
Break up? The United States was 37 states loosely bound by a single constitution. When it appeared some states were seeking to abolish slavery, something that was agreed to in the Constitution, then the Slave States felt that it was the abolitionist states that were breaking the agreement.

I agree with Lee that building certain monuments can create division. I also feel the same way about destroying 100+ year monuments. Better to follow George Santayana's advice and learn from the past instead of creating divisions and/or trying to bury it as if it never happened.

From your link:
“I think it wiser,” the retired military leader wrote about a proposed Gettysburg memorial in 1869, “…not to keep open the sores of war but to follow the examples of those nations who endeavored to obliterate the marks of civil strife, to commit to oblivion the feelings engendered.”

Historical Context: The Constitution and Slavery | Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History

Historical Context: The Constitution and Slavery | On the 200th anniversary of the ratification of the US Constitution, Thurgood Marshall, the first African American to sit on the Supreme Court, said that the Constitution was "defective from the start." He pointed out that the framers had left...
www.gilderlehrman.org www.gilderlehrman.org
The framers of the Constitution believed that concessions on slavery were the price for the support of southern delegates for a strong central government. They were convinced that if the Constitution restricted the slave trade, South Carolina and Georgia would refuse to join the Union. But by sidestepping the slavery issue, the framers left the seeds for future conflict. After the convention approved the great compromise, Madison wrote: "It seems now to be pretty well understood that the real difference of interests lies not between the large and small but between the northern and southern states. The institution of slavery and its consequences form the line of discrimination."

Of the 55 delegates to the Constitutional Convention, about 25 owned slaves. Many of the framers harbored moral qualms about slavery. Some, including Benjamin Franklin (a former slaveholder) and Alexander Hamilton (who was born in a slave colony in the British West Indies) became members of anti-slavery societies.
Click to expand...
Yes, they were trying to break up the US. It does not matter that the South wanted slavery and would fight to keep it. Nor is it relevant that that distills down to an economic argument for maintaining cheap labor. What matter is after the war was done, Lee felt statues would be constant reminders about what the South was fighting for, and it was not a good or holy reason. It was a bloody conflict that was better off pushed away into history, not providing constant reminders of the horrors.
 
Nordberg said:
Yes, they were trying to break up the US. It does not matter that the South wanted slavery and would fight to keep it. Nor is it relevant that that distills down to an economic argument for maintaining cheap labor. What matter is after the war was done, Lee felt statues would be constant reminders about what the South was fighting for, and it was not a good or holy reason. It was a bloody conflict that was better off pushed away into history, not providing constant reminders of the horrors.
Click to expand...
Ummm...no. Again, our schools are failing our nation by failing to teach history.

You're like an abusive husband attacking their wife for "breaking up" their marriage by filing for divorce whereas most people respect the wife's right to leave an abusive husband who is violating their marriage vows.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XqwMo130fR8
Click to expand...
kristen-going.gif
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
So commission something else. A famous mayor in that town. A favorite teacher. A fountain.
Click to expand...
They haven't. Why? Because the action was divisive instead of unifying. Think of where our nation is now and track back to how we got here.

IMO, it's because our leaders are divisive and dictatorial to the opposition. "YOU need to do this!" instead of "We should do this."

The Left destroyed the monuments, thereby creating further division and now the MAGAts are destroying DEI.
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
So commission something else. A famous mayor in that town. A favorite teacher. A fountain.
Click to expand...

Dutch Uncle said:
Ummm...no. Again, our schools are failing our nation by failing to teach history.

You're like an abusive husband attacking their wife for "breaking up" their marriage by filing for divorce whereas most people respect the wife's right to leave an abusive husband who is violating their marriage vows.
Click to expand...

Dutch Uncle said:
Ummm...no. Again, our schools are failing our nation by failing to teach history.

You're like an abusive husband attacking their wife for "breaking up" their marriage by filing for divorce whereas most people respect the wife's right to leave an abusive husband who is violating their marriage vows.
Click to expand...
So, are the slaves the children of this bad marriage who witnessed and suffered the abuse and they no longer want to acknowledge their abusive parent? How do they figure in this bad analogy of yours? Should they be forced to memorialize those men who wanted to preserve their hell?
 
Phantasmal said:
So, are the slaves the children of this bad marriage who witnessed and suffered the abuse and they no longer want to acknowledge their abusive parent? How do they figure in this bad analogy of yours? Should they be forced to memorialize those men who wanted to preserve their hell?
Click to expand...
Slavery is an abomination. There's no disagreement there. The subject is destroying and burying history rather than learning from it.

By destroying the monuments, the Left has drawn a red line of division. It would have been smarter to surround such monuments with monuments to people like Harriet Tubman, Frederick Douglas, the heroes of the 54th Massachusetts, Rosa Parks, MLK, and others who promoted protecting the rights of all Americans.

Now there's no history. Just green grass and a heavily divided nation being run by White Nationalists.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
It isn't, but it does in a sense, deify one minor player in a much bigger part of history. The Left likes to do this, find a single person that fits their dogma and then anoint them as the be-all, end-all of something. It's like they grant sainthood to them. All others are ignored. It's a perversion of history.

As another example of this, compare Rosa Parks who did nothing other than object to changing seats and getting arrested to ZERO change in anything to Elizabeth Jennings who got similar treatment on the NYC trolly system of her time and subsequently won in court and got the system desegregated.

The Left loves Parks because she's a nothing who resisted futilely. The Left hates Jennings because she was an intelligent, well-educated, and successful woman from an upper middle-class family who successfully fought the system using the existing rules.
Click to expand...
Isn't that your opinion?
 
AProudLefty said:
Isn't that your opinion?
Click to expand...
Yes, based on observation. Look at Dutch Dork's post above. The usual popular litany for the Left on this. For example, there is only one statue of Elizabeth Jennings Graham, but there are many of Rosa Parks, and Graham's statue in NYC was only recently put on display.

d002d6130d51ddd631cd994bbc03f66e.jpg
 
Last edited:
AProudLefty said:
Schools can take the students to the museums.
Click to expand...
Where are the museums? Are the monuments destroyed? Kept in storage because there are no museums?

Is it cheaper to build a large museum with all of these monuments or just surround the old monuments with monuments to Civil Rights leaders? Women's Suffrage? Where are the statues to Alice Paul? Frederick Douglas? Medal of Honor recipient Sgt. William H. Barnes?

www.battlefields.org

William H. Barnes

Among the first to enter the enemy's works, although wounded.
www.battlefields.org www.battlefields.org

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDgQEHO8Fng
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top