Attacking you, jeebus Dutch, get over yourself.
Why is educating about Tubman bad?
- Thread starter Jarod
- Start date
We know why the monuments were built. It’s why they need to go. They are racist and tributes to slave owners, and traitors.
I'd like to see monuments in the Deep South dedicated to white southerners who stayed loyal to the United States, because there were more than just a few of them. In fact, four slave states stayed loyal to the United States.
I always thought @Jarod was male - but who knows?
Go fuck your dad fake Jew
You mean, the DEMOCRATS were trying to break up the US.
You want us to forget the past so it can repeat.
The fight over illegals is the same fight over cheap labor. Illegals are the new slave class that democrats demand are crucial for economic success. A cheap labor caste is vital to the two tiered economy democrats demand - a labor caste of have nots.
You started and fight the current civil war for the same reason your party started the last one, cheap labor.
Daylight63
Verified User
Like deifying the master "Deal maker" who has run 6 businesses into bankruptcy including at least one casino.
Like praising a man who has been found guilty of felonies and sexual assaults.
Like making Canada one of our enemies.
Is Stormfront down today?
The great grand children of the last generation of slaves held by the democrats are dying off.
The crime against humanity of today are the new slaves democrats keep, the illegal aliens. The civil war your party is engaged in against America is identical to the first one - you are fighting to keep slavery.
I know, right? That 450% tariff Canada has on American dairy goods is super friendly.
How DARE America place a 25% tariff on Canadian goods?
You're not an America hating hypocrite and fraud at all.....
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
For the reasons you listed. I'm not defending racism or oppression, regardless which way it's flowing. All I'm saying is that we can't fix racism with racism and we can't unite people with division.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
In 1865? I doubt it. The nation lost 2% of the population due to the Civil War. In today's numbers, that would equal 6.6M dead Americans. The South, where the vast majority of the fighting took place, was effectively destroyed. The "Reconstruction" did nothing except continue to punish Southerners. There as a lot of resentment then which is still with us 160 years later. There is no healing, only division and hate.
So Jefferson the slave rapist is okay? Was he a Democrat? LOL
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Yes they were put up by racists, but Lincoln was a racist. Same for Jefferson. It was the times. Now that the monuments have been torn down, what do you have? Division and a lot of green grass. Nothing else. Tired of Winning yet? LOL
Jeebus, “they were men of their times” doesn’t hold water in the argument for monuments being erected during Jim Crow, and men being traitors to the United States who warred against their country?
I don’t respect Jefferson since I found out he was a slave owner and a rapist. I also lost respect for Lincoln and LBJ when I found out they were racists.
They had other accomplishments to memorialize.
Tell me what Lee, a man who betrayed his country and warred against it did for America that should be memorialized?
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
That's be nice, but, again, we can't build unity through destruction and division. Rather than tearing statues down it would have been smarter to build some around them.
Now, all there that remains is division and green grass.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Did you defend Bill Clinton for being a "man of his time"? His sex life being a private matter? Yes, even a hundred years ago, there were a lot of racist assholes both north and south of the Mason-Dixon line.
The 1930s were closer to the Civil War than us, in 2025, are to the Korean War. The bitterness of Southerners against the North was still strong then. While they were certainly racist, there was also a large element of "FUCK YOU YANKEES!" by erecting statues to Confederate Generals.
Why weren't the statues built earlier? Because the North, under Reconstruction, wouldn't allow it. After Reconstruction officially ended in 1877, there was still the legacy of the Northerners dominating, and in many cases, cheating, Southern citizens. Southerners were second class citizens in the new and improved United States.
The fact you keep claiming Lee betrayed "his country" proves you don't understand history, Phan. Fine. Your choice to believe as you wish.
Again, my main point is that we can't unify the nation by creating divisions of "Us vs. Them". We can't end racism by being racist.
FWIW, there's no such thing as race as the Human Genome project proved but racists don't accept history nor science. LOL
I know many here aren't interested in history, but this is for those who are curious about how we got from there to here:
Reconstruction era - Wikipedia
The Dunning School of scholars, who were trained at the history department of Columbia University under Professor William A. Dunning, analyzed Reconstruction as a failure after 1866 for different reasons. They claimed that Congress took freedoms and rights from qualified Whites and gave them to unqualified Blacks who were being duped by what they called "corrupt carpetbaggers and scalawags". As T. Harry Williams (who was a sharp critic of the Dunning School) noted, the Dunning scholars portrayed the era in stark terms:[292]
Reconstruction was a battle between two extremes: the Democrats, as the group which included the vast majority of the whites, standing for decent government and racial supremacy, versus the Republicans, the Negroes, alien carpetbaggers, and renegade scalawags, standing for dishonest government and alien ideals. These historians wrote literally in terms of white and black.
Revisionists and Beardians, 1930s–1940s
In the 1930s, historical revisionism became popular among scholars. As disciples of Charles A. Beard, revisionists focused on economics, downplaying politics and constitutional issues. The central figure was a young scholar at the University of Wisconsin, Howard K. Beale, who in his PhD dissertation, finished in 1924, developed a complex new interpretation of Reconstruction. The Dunning School portrayed freedmen as mere pawns in the hands of northern whites. Beale argued that the whites themselves were pawns in the hands of Northern industrialists, who had taken control of the nation during the Civil War and who Beale felt would be threatened by return to power of the Southern Whites. Beale further argued that the rhetoric of civil rights for Blacks, and the dream of equality, was rhetoric designed to fool idealistic voters, calling it "claptrap", arguing: "Constitutional discussions of the rights of the Negro, the status of Southern states, the legal position of ex-rebels, and the powers of Congress and the president determined nothing. They were pure sham."[293][294] The Beard–Beale interpretation of Reconstruction became known as "revisionism", and replaced the Dunning School for most historians until the 1950s, after which it was largely discredited.[295][253][296][297]
The Beardian interpretation of the causes of the Civil War downplayed slavery, abolitionism, and issues of morality. It ignored constitutional issues of states' rights and even ignored American nationalism as the force that finally led to victory in the war. Indeed, the ferocious combat itself was passed over as merely an ephemeral event. Much more important was the calculus of class conflict. As the Beards explained in The Rise of American Civilization (1927), the Civil War was really a:[298]
social cataclysm in which the capitalists, laborers, and farmers of the North and West drove from power in the national government the planting aristocracy of the South.
The Beards were especially interested in the Reconstruction era, as the industrialists of the Northeast and the farmers of the West cashed in on their great victory over the Southern aristocracy. Historian Richard Hofstadter paraphrases the Beards as arguing that in victory:[299]
the Northern capitalists were able to impose their economic program, quickly passing a series of measures on tariffs, banking, homesteads, and immigration that guaranteed the success of their plans for economic development. Solicitude for the freedmen had little to do with Northern policies. The Fourteenth Amendment, which gave the Negro his citizenship, Beard found significant primarily as a result of a conspiracy of a few legislative draftsmen friendly to corporations to use the supposed elevation of the blacks as a cover for a fundamental law giving strong protection to business corporations against regulation by state government.
I think there should be statutes all over the South of Texas Governor Sam Houston, who remained fiercely loyal to the United States, openly opposed succession, and warned that succeeding from the United States would lead to the downfall and ruin of the South. He was a patriot to the United States.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
There are. Texans even named its largest city after him.
The 67' tall statue billed as “World’s Tallest Statue of an American Hero" is of Sam Houston.
I think Houston was a patriot to Texas and, having seen life under independence and as part of the United States, saw it was better to not secede.
Guno צְבִי
We fight, We win, Am Yisrael Chai
TOP
Retired Teacher
Good Morning Panicans!! https://www.wxii12.com/article/harr...cle had swapped,to government websites as the Seriously try to have a good day....