First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next  Last
Post Reply New Orleans is taking down Confederate monuments
22985 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Oppai Hell
Offline
Posted 4/24/17

Ejanss wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:
Many people south of here do dislike Sherman's March to the Sea.

It had a terror aspect, and wantonly violated several of the constitutional rights that applied to United States soil, in a way. (Quartering, No Compensation for goods seized by government forces.)

It was of course a military campaign.


And therefore exempt from those rules. (Ie., no quartering or government acquisition in PEACETIME.)

Although using those rules to enforce the Emancipation Proclamation by freeing slaves in seized territories did skate dangerously on definitions of what was "property" of an "enemy country". (Since the whole point was to convince the, quote, "Confederacy" otherwise on both counts.)

Like Rhett Butler said, the Confederacy didn't really have any standing as an army or new nation, "all they had was cotton, slaves, and arrogance".
Sherman's March may have been as "excessive" as dropping the bomb on Hiroshima, but in either sense, it was pimp-slapping a country that had started to take national pride in warfare, and see it as the glorious new soul of their people's identity. Be Careful What You Wish For, on a catastrophic scale.


I understood it as the destroying of the Southern machine, both in morale and livelihood, which makes sense in forcing the Confederacy to come back. Although I did not know about the peacetime line.

One may call back to the Geneva Convention and other papers detailing war crimes, which apparently do apply retroactively, and considering it as a point of further discussion.

I suppose Sherman did the "safest" thing with his scorched earth policy.
jl6
469 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / Florida
Offline
Posted 4/24/17
you can't erase history fools
849 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / F / PA, USA
Offline
Posted 4/24/17 , edited 4/24/17

rawratl wrote:


Cardamom_Ginger wrote:

They aren't even going to stick those things in Civil War museums and whatnot, I bet. Disgraceful. So much for being able to tour historical landmarks and monuments. I hope the realize that those monuments were tourist attractions. So much for New Orleans' tourist industry.


Huh?

Yeah man, taking down those white supremacists statues is definitely going to destroy New Orlean's tourism industry. I know when I went there those were first on my list. People definitely don't go there to eat the food, drink in public, and see Mardis Gras


Oh, sure, and pretend folks don't go to check out Civil War memorabilia and the rest. While we're at it, people don't tour Gettysburg, either. I return your eyeroll in kind. History buffs are a thing, and dissuading their attention is still a loss in tourism, regardless of your acknowledgment.
22985 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Oppai Hell
Offline
Posted 4/24/17

Cardamom_Ginger wrote:


rawratl wrote:


Cardamom_Ginger wrote:

They aren't even going to stick those things in Civil War museums and whatnot, I bet. Disgraceful. So much for being able to tour historical landmarks and monuments. I hope the realize that those monuments were tourist attractions. So much for New Orleans' tourist industry.


Huh?

Yeah man, taking down those white supremacists statues is definitely going to destroy New Orlean's tourism industry. I know when I went there those were first on my list. People definitely don't go there to eat the food, drink in public, and see Mardis Gras


Oh, sure, and pretend folks don't go to check out Civil War memorabilia and the rest. While we're at it, people don't tour Gettysburg, either. I return your eyeroll in kind. History buffs are a thing, and dissuading their attention is still a loss in tourism, regardless of your acknowledgment.


I find it weird that people want to enact the Civil War of all things.
7259 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 4/24/17
why do they want to get rid of history?
849 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / F / PA, USA
Offline
Posted 4/24/17 , edited 4/24/17

PeripheralVisionary wrote:

I find it weird that people want to enact the Civil War of all things.

The USA doesn't have a long list of wars on our soil, and the Civil War was very dramatic. Generally, though, re-enactors take part in other war recreations and take pride in the characters they roleplay. Usually, it's a grand time for everyone involved.
21555 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Hoosierville
Offline
Posted 4/24/17 , edited 5/7/17
can we start removing mosques because of 9/11 now?
39161 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 4/24/17

AppleFart wrote:

Trying to hide history always turns out well.


I have mixed feelings too. On the one hand, I don't like the idea of having monuments that venerate people, groups, or ideals that promote hate or division. On the other hand, if those statues were moved to a museum with plaques detailing the hateful history behind them, and pointing to how such things must never be allowed to happen again, is also the best way to do it.

NOT hiding history, while NOT venerating what they stood for.
39161 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 4/24/17

jl6 wrote:

you can't erase history fools


In Los Angeles, they're doing a real good job of erasing history. They do it by not teaching it. I haven't met a high school kid in Los Angeles that knows anything about U.S. history, except that the United States took Los Angeles from Mexico. They don't know about the Industrial Revolution, they don't know about the Monroe Doctrine, they don't know about the Louisiana Purchase.

It's not their fault. The school districts just don't want to teach U.S. history.
8921 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / Ark-La-Tex
Offline
Posted 4/25/17

Cardamom_Ginger wrote:


rawratl wrote:


Cardamom_Ginger wrote:

They aren't even going to stick those things in Civil War museums and whatnot, I bet. Disgraceful. So much for being able to tour historical landmarks and monuments. I hope the realize that those monuments were tourist attractions. So much for New Orleans' tourist industry.


Huh?

Yeah man, taking down those white supremacists statues is definitely going to destroy New Orlean's tourism industry. I know when I went there those were first on my list. People definitely don't go there to eat the food, drink in public, and see Mardis Gras


Oh, sure, and pretend folks don't go to check out Civil War memorabilia and the rest. While we're at it, people don't tour Gettysburg, either. I return your eyeroll in kind. History buffs are a thing, and dissuading their attention is still a loss in tourism, regardless of your acknowledgment.


I've never known a tourist who came to NOLA for the monuments. Just saying.
849 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / F / PA, USA
Offline
Posted 4/25/17 , edited 4/25/17

geauxtigers1989 wrote:

I've never known a tourist who came to NOLA for the monuments. Just saying.


It's the kind of thing I wish that I got around to doing when I lived in Mississippi. There's a couple of places down South that, in spite of living relatively close, I didn't get the opportunity to look around before my move up North.

Of course, that's not the only thing I want to do. Hitting Cafe du Monde again is a primary highlight. Oh, and the fudge shop in the big mall, and the aquarium.
1748 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M
Offline
Posted 4/25/17 , edited 5/25/17
This is whitewashing of history plan and simple the north were not the good guys. No one was the good guys. Yet every year it seem a bit more of the real history of the civil war is washed away. It was about slaves! No that was the moral justification after the fact only 1.2% to 1.5 % of souterner had slaves. It was about economic issues between the north and the south. The north wanted cheaper raw materials from the south and the south wanted better pay for such materials. The south did horroible things? You mean like the north 34% of southerns died in that war not just fighting men in that either. The North was known to rape, pillage, and murder whole communities. Sherman's march was just evil. And No the south will not rise agan. I think the outcome was the right one in the end, But we need to stop pretending the civil was was some black and white war. No one was good during that war.
8921 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / Ark-La-Tex
Offline
Posted 4/25/17

Cardamom_Ginger wrote:


geauxtigers1989 wrote:

I've never known a tourist who came to NOLA for the monuments. Just saying.


It's the kind of thing I wish that I got around to doing when I lived in Mississippi. There's a couple of places down South that, in spite of living relatively close, I didn't get the opportunity to look around before my move up North.

Of course, that's not the only thing I want to do. Hitting Cafe du Monde again is a primary highlight. Oh, and the fudge shop in the big mall, and the aquarium.


This is making me homesick.
8921 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / Ark-La-Tex
Offline
Posted 4/25/17

neotag wrote:

This is whitewashing of history plan and simple the north were not the good guys. No one was the good guys. Yet every year it seem a bit more of the real history of the civil war is washed away. It was about slaves! No that was the moral justification after the fact only 1.2% to 1.5 % of souterner had slaves. It was about economic issues between the north and the south. The north wanted cheaper raw materials from the south and the south wanted better pay for such materials. The south did horroible things? You mean like the north 34% of southerns died in that war not just fighting men in that either. The North was known to rape, pillage, and murder whole communities. Sherman's march was just evil. And No the south will not rise agan. I think the outcome was the right one in the end, But we need to stop pretending the civil was was some black and white war. No one was good during that war.


It was about slavery. This can easily be verified by checking documents from the time.
1748 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M
Offline
Posted 4/25/17 , edited 4/25/17

geauxtigers1989 wrote:


neotag wrote:

This is whitewashing of history plan and simple the north were not the good guys. No one was the good guys. Yet every year it seem a bit more of the real history of the civil war is washed away. It was about slaves! No that was the moral justification after the fact only 1.2% to 1.5 % of souterner had slaves. It was about economic issues between the north and the south. The north wanted cheaper raw materials from the south and the south wanted better pay for such materials. The south did horroible things? You mean like the north 34% of southerns died in that war not just fighting men in that either. The North was known to rape, pillage, and murder whole communities. Sherman's march was just evil. And No the south will not rise agan. I think the outcome was the right one in the end, But we need to stop pretending the civil was was some black and white war. No one was good during that war.


It was about slavery. This can easily be verified by checking documents from the time.


You can pretend all you want that's what it was about But it really wasn't. Less then 2% of people in the south had slaves. It was about he fact that the north was squeezing the south economically. During that time the north had mechanized it's factories and could not get enough raw material from the south so they demanded more production at a lower cost. The south said no more so the north in a move to morally justify what was already a country divided in a cold war and outlawed slavery(sort of seriously go read the many loopholes in that). Which turned the cold war hot. You have to ignore years of build up and several violent incidents to just blanket say the civil war was about slavery. Not that this matter to the main point of my comment that we keep whitewashing our history of the civil war. Hell the Wikipedia page on Sherman's march make next to no mention of the what we would consider war crimes he committed. No one was the Good guy in the civil war. 
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.