- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Trending video about Confederate Romanticism in the South
Posted on 10/26/17 at 8:29 am to TbirdSpur2010
Posted on 10/26/17 at 8:29 am to TbirdSpur2010
I know.
"You can't have a rational conversation, you simpleton"
"if people were rational about slavery, rather than being babbies"
I mean this is typical of the current era. He's saying no one is rational while failing to stay rational. Though that's Bug AC. Lol
"You can't have a rational conversation, you simpleton"
"if people were rational about slavery, rather than being babbies"
I mean this is typical of the current era. He's saying no one is rational while failing to stay rational. Though that's Bug AC. Lol
0
Posted on 10/26/17 at 8:31 am to GetCocky11
I like being southern and I like the south
That doesn't mean I have southern pride or confederate pride, certainly not the latter, which is stupid
That doesn't mean I have southern pride or confederate pride, certainly not the latter, which is stupid
Posted on 10/26/17 at 8:31 am to Napoleon
Shelbey Foote claims the cause of the war was akin to two men getting in a drunken brawl at the bar with neither knowing the true root cause of the fight but just that it must be carried out. Your arguments imply that if the south was fighting to protect slavery, the north's main goal was to abolish it which just wasn't true for the common Union soldier. They didn't give a shite about blacks.
History is complex. There were some extremely talented men on the side of the confederacy that serve as great examples for what all men should strive for and that's who I think should be honored.
History is complex. There were some extremely talented men on the side of the confederacy that serve as great examples for what all men should strive for and that's who I think should be honored.
This post was edited on 10/26/17 at 8:32 am
Posted on 10/26/17 at 8:31 am to bigrob385series
quote:
another fact that is overlooked is that these slaves weren't bribed or tricked into coming here,they were sold by there own
What. The. frick.
Everyone in Africa wasn't on the same team just because they had dark skin. No moreso than Europe and the umpteen wars waged/slavery perpetuated between people of similar skin tones.
That was really dumb of you
This post was edited on 10/26/17 at 8:32 am
Posted on 10/26/17 at 8:32 am to Napoleon
This post was edited on 10/26/17 at 8:35 am
Posted on 10/26/17 at 8:34 am to GreatLakesTiger24
quote:
Why would you feel pride in another person's actions or accomplishments
This could have been an interesting discussion if you weren't retarded about it.
Once you start claiming pride over your ancestry, shouldn't you also claim shame over them. No matter how great your grandparents were, if you go back far enough you're gonna find a rapist.
Maybe we should learn from history instead of taking pride in it. I'm glad our grandparents fought Hitler, but it's kinda depressing the way they treated black veterans afterwards. Not something to be proud or ashamed of but it is something we can learn from.
Posted on 10/26/17 at 8:35 am to TbirdSpur2010
quote:
TbirdSpur2010
There is very little more bizarre than these stupid knee jerk reactions to awful things
"slavery was wrong"
"well sure, but the blacks sold the other blacks"
Posted on 10/26/17 at 8:36 am to Napoleon
in no way am I trying to justify slavery, it is a moral evil.
with that being said if you are going to judge people of a certain time you have to judge them by the standards of that time (where slavery was a normal thing)
the north makes it out to be some holy war and it simply wasn’t the case
of course there were dick owners and mistreatment all over but that does not accurately describe the situation for everyone and the history is skewed into making us believe our ancestors were purely evil
with that being said if you are going to judge people of a certain time you have to judge them by the standards of that time (where slavery was a normal thing)
the north makes it out to be some holy war and it simply wasn’t the case
of course there were dick owners and mistreatment all over but that does not accurately describe the situation for everyone and the history is skewed into making us believe our ancestors were purely evil
Posted on 10/26/17 at 8:36 am to bigrob385series
Most were sold by black people.
Currently do we destroy drug farms or do we arrest drug dealers?
We in the US can't go after long defunct tribes for long ago crimes. We can just admit to our own and move on.
See we think of everything in terms of race. In Africa, it's tribal. They didn't think of it as selling blacks they were following the millennia old tradition of making slaves out of captured peoples and enemies.
Western civilization stopped the practice well before but didn't stop the practice of funding the slave trade. The American and Brazilian agriculture booms pushed slave trading to one of the most profitable endeavours at the time.
Justified? No. But just like the demand for drugs fuels the drug trade, the demand for slaves expanded the slave trade.
Like drugs, in the end the buyers are to blame.
Currently do we destroy drug farms or do we arrest drug dealers?
We in the US can't go after long defunct tribes for long ago crimes. We can just admit to our own and move on.
See we think of everything in terms of race. In Africa, it's tribal. They didn't think of it as selling blacks they were following the millennia old tradition of making slaves out of captured peoples and enemies.
Western civilization stopped the practice well before but didn't stop the practice of funding the slave trade. The American and Brazilian agriculture booms pushed slave trading to one of the most profitable endeavours at the time.
Justified? No. But just like the demand for drugs fuels the drug trade, the demand for slaves expanded the slave trade.
Like drugs, in the end the buyers are to blame.
Posted on 10/26/17 at 8:37 am to TbirdSpur2010
quote:
There is always a quintessential issue.
There is ONLY one issue ANY war is fought and that is money. EVERY SINGLE TIME.
Slave were a huge financial asset to the South. They made the wholesale, large scale farming profitable. Farming did not, for the most part, exist up North. If the South could have been as profitable without slaves, they would have done so.
Was secession against the law?
Posted on 10/26/17 at 8:37 am to GetCocky11
why don’t you look up and read what General Lee’s slaves had to say about him?
Posted on 10/26/17 at 8:37 am to Collegedropout
Wait, trashy black people exist too?
Free Black people also owned slaves?
It's almost like owning people as property isn't limited to black or white.
Free Black people also owned slaves?
It's almost like owning people as property isn't limited to black or white.
Posted on 10/26/17 at 8:41 am to TbirdSpur2010
quote:I agree,so is my statement true or false?
Everyone in Africa wasn't on the same team just because they had dark skin.
Posted on 10/26/17 at 8:42 am to Napoleon
quote:
But what is rational here. I do not find human ownership to be rational.
Congratulations??? I'm not saying slavery was rational, i'm saying it is possible to talk rationally about slavery. Remove emotions and the "right/wrong" factor for a second. What was slavery? It was a cheap means of production for Southern plantation owners, and a cheap means of acquiring a product for profit for Southern and Northern businesses. In the end, it was business. Not saying it was good business, but at it's simplest form, it was business where all parties involved benefitted, except the poor slaves, themselves. Within that business model, there were multiple parties involved... Where did they get the slaves? Who sold them? Who bought them? Who utilized them? Who benefited from their work? The point being, with these questions, there are a multitude of guilty parties, yet the finger only gets pointed at the slave owners. Which is correct, but the other complicit parties are culpable as well and should be called out too.
And as i stated earlier, in those times, your state was your country. State pride was above country pride. So when another country (state) told the southern states, you can no longer do something, then not only are the slave owners and profiteers angered by this, but those with no skin in the game are also put off by a foreigner telling their fellow citizens what they can and can't do. So yes, the Civil War was fought over slavery, but it also was fought over states rights. Both can be correct without being offended.
Now other questions are brought up that should be rightfully discussed such as, why did it take 2 years into the civil war before the emancipation proclamation was signed? That is indeed, a valid point, that if Slavery was such a big issue, then why didn't the proclamation be presented before the war? Well, one of the answers, is politics. Lincoln won a very tight race. And as i stated earlier, Northern business owners benefited form the proliferation of slavery. It is arguable, that if it was known that Lincoln was going to sign the EP earlier during his campaign, he wouldn't have been elected in the first place.
I have work to do, so my replies will be more sparse, but this is what i'm talking about, about having a conversation without getting emotionally invested in one side or another.
Posted on 10/26/17 at 8:42 am to 25smeckles
quote:
with that being said if you are going to judge people of a certain time you have to judge them by the standards of that time (where slavery was a normal thing)
Countries that would be considered "civilized" by the standards of the time had been abolishing slavery over the prior 60 years before the Civil War broke out in the US.
Not to mention, the number of US states that no longer had slavery and the whole prohibition of slavery in the Northwest Ordinance.
I'd say the standard of the time was one that showed slavery to generally be viewed as a bad thing and that it shouldn't exist anymore.
Posted on 10/26/17 at 8:43 am to GreatLakesTiger24
quote:
GreatLakesTiger24 - I'm fiscally conservative and socially retarded
You definitely verified the later.
Posted on 10/26/17 at 8:43 am to BugAC
quote:
Which is correct, but the other complicit parties are culpable as well and should be called out too.
Are the other parties still waving their old flag and celebrating everything it represented while conveniently ignoring slavery?
Posted on 10/26/17 at 8:44 am to LucasP
Being ashamed of those things is just as stupid as being proud of them
Posted on 10/26/17 at 8:45 am to Big_Slim
Again, it never ever ever matters what the soldier Is fighting for. Only the acts of the leaders. Sure soldiers didn't have slaves and didn't have a dig in the fight. I mean we haven't fought a war in defense of our nation in a very very long time, does that mean we don't have wars anymore?
You think Bush or Obama thinks about how much troops like the desert or their feelings on Saddam?
No.
So it's not and never is or will be about the opinions or thoughts of the troops.
The thoughts of the leaders make the point clear as day.
The first state to leave the union, South Carolina:
You think Bush or Obama thinks about how much troops like the desert or their feelings on Saddam?
No.
So it's not and never is or will be about the opinions or thoughts of the troops.
The thoughts of the leaders make the point clear as day.
The first state to leave the union, South Carolina:
quote:
A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the States north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery. He is to be entrusted with the administration of the common Government, because he has declared that that “Government cannot endure permanently half slave, half free,” and that the public mind must rest in the belief that slavery is in the course of ultimate extinction. This sectional combination for the submersion of the Constitution, has been aided in some of the States by elevating to citizenship, persons who, by the supreme law of the land, are incapable of becoming citizens; and their votes have been used to inaugurate a new policy, hostile to the South, and destructive of its beliefs and safety.
This post was edited on 10/26/17 at 8:57 am
Posted on 10/26/17 at 8:45 am to Big_Slim
quote:
There were some extremely talented men on the side of the confederacy that serve as great examples for what all men should strive for
I think I'll strive against fighting to break up the USA over the owning of humans to power the economy, if it's all the same to you
Page 5 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News