Is George Washington the same as Robert E. Lee?

What a strange place we have arrived. I wonder how many Trump supporters imagined they would one day be in the position of defending Robert E. Lee as being as great a man as George Washington and Thomas Jefferson. They all owned slaves and therefore must be morally equivalent, right? Trump's moral authority on any topic is if you ever did anything bad then it is okay as long as there are other respected individuals who did the same. But let's hear it since this is all about "statues" and the "value of history" and it has absolutely nothing to do with ethnic cleansing and racial supremacy.

"We the people" have always reacted this way. Regardless of the issue, once it (the issue, offensive monuments, in this example) has gained some traction, the pendulum swings way past the rational stopping point. Who gets to decide what's offensive and what's not? Where does it stop? There are skeletons in everyone's closet.

It's a time-honored tradition in debate to talk yourself into a corner. People don't want statues taken down, so they try to equate them with more popular statues. This continues to its logical* conclusion, in the back right corner. On the ceiling.

The issue is not per say slavery. The main issue is that Robert E. Lee and his confederate cohorts were traitors to the US by rising up in a violent rebellion. That is the main reason that no statues should exist of them.

An added fact is that they for the black population are not only symbols of slavery but more importantly symbols of resistance against abolishing slavery.

PeteEU said:

The issue is not per say slavery. The main issue is that Robert E. Lee and his confederate cohorts were traitors to the US by rising up in a violent rebellion. That is the main reason that no statues should exist of them.

An added fact is that they for the black population are not only symbols of slavery but more importantly symbols of resistance against abolishing slavery.

Click to expand...

George Washington was a traitor to England by use of violent rebellion. However, there is a mitigating factor involved. He won.

RAMOSS said:

George Washington was a traitor to England by use of violent rebellion. However, there is a mitigating factor involved. He won.

Click to expand...

Yes the victor writes the history... just a fact of history.

PeteEU said:

The issue is not per say slavery. The main issue is that Robert E. Lee and his confederate cohorts were traitors to the US by rising up in a violent rebellion. That is the main reason that no statues should exist of them.

An added fact is that they for the black population are not only symbols of slavery but more importantly symbols of resistance against abolishing slavery.

Click to expand...

An George Washington could had been hung and legally hung, if the colonies had lost for being a traitor to his King and his country for that matter.

Before the break the foundering fathers consider themselves Englishmen with the rights and duties of Englishmen.

Hell Washington joined with a foreign enemy of England France to make war against the Empire and his King so there is no question he was indeed a traitor to his 'country'.

Franklin son decided to remain loyal to the crown and he and his father never talk again.

In other word it not that damn simple.

BillRM said:

An George Washington could had been hung and legally hung, if the colonies had lost for being a traitor to his King and his country for that matter.

Before the break the foundering fathers consider themselves Englishmen with the rights and duties of Englishmen.

Hell Washington joined with a foreign enemy of England France to make war against the Empire and his King so there is no question he was indeed a traitor to his 'country'.

Franklin son decided to remain loyal to the crown and he and his father never talk again.

In other word it not that damn simple.

Click to expand...

Yes it is not simple in that case, but in the case of the confederacy it is simple.. they were traitors and there should not be any statues glorifying them.

Had the British won the war of independence, then I highly doubt that there would be any statues of Washington or any of the rebels.

PeteEU said:

Yes it is not simple in that case, but in the case of the confederacy it is simple.. they were traitors and there should not be any statues glorifying them.

Had the British won the war of independence, then I highly doubt that there would be any statues of Washington or any of the rebels.

Click to expand...

Why do you question that if Washington and the colonies had lost that a few generation later people annoy at the Brit government would not put up some Washington statues in the colonies ?

Take note most of the pro southern statues was put into place in the 1920s and later by people annoy at the then Federal government.

The difference is George Washington won his war.

Had the Confederacy won and become their own nation, Lee very well could have become their President at some point. They probably would have gotten rid of slavery in another 50 or 70 years and the Confederate States of America would be around today and Lee would be on their money and he would have statues galore.

But they lost.

BillRM said:

Why do you question that if Washington and the colonies had lost that a few generation later people annoy at the Brit government would not put up some Washington statues in the colonies ?

Click to expand...

Because there are very few statues of enemies of the state?

Take note most of the pro southern statues was put into place in the 1920s and later by people annoy at the then Federal government.

Click to expand...

yes.. and the Federal government should have done something about it then.

It would be like putting up statues of Hitler in Germany... come on man, stop being blind to the truth.

PeteEU said:

Because there are very few statues of enemies of the state?



yes.. and the Federal government should have done something about it then.

It would be like putting up statues of Hitler in Germany... come on man, stop being blind to the truth.

Click to expand...

Is not having a 'free' society a pain in the neck at times?

Somehow I question if the US courts would had allowed a ban on confederate statues in the 1920s and given the feelings of southerns in that time frame any such ban could had set off another civil war.

Hell the KKK was operating in a open manner in the south with members having positions in state governments.

Here is one of their marches in Washington DC at the time.



footnote I never knew that Hitler and Lee have anything in common thanks for the information.

BillRM said:

Is not having a 'free' society a pain in the neck at times?

Somehow I question if the US courts would had allowed a ban on confederate statues in the 1920s and given the feelings of southerns in that time frame any such ban could had set off another civil war.

Hell the KKK was operating in a open manner in the south with members having positions in state governments.

Here is one of their marches in Washington DC at the time.



footnote I never knew that Hitler and Lee have anything in common thanks for the information.

Click to expand...

Nothing to do with a "free society". It has to do with allowing criminals running around openly without punishment.

The KKK and others were openly breaking the laws by murdering and preventing the black population in doing basic things.. like voting. The Federal government did nothing, because (much like now), it was infested with pro Nazi types. It was highly anti-semitic, and pro white. The US was the cradle of eugenics and that policy actually got into laws, that later would allow the death of millions.

So it is time for the US to say "listen.. our past is full of racism and anti-Semitic values and now we will deal with it". Tearing down the statues and plagues is one of the steps. You dont forget what happened, because we have books.. yea books, the thing that Neo Nazis love to burn so they can change history to fit in their wacked out world view.

Defending Neo Nazis and the KKK is supporting them.. it has nothing to do with free speech, as you cant have free speech if you are defending peoples who want to take away the right to free speech.. yes that is what the Nazi Trump scum want to do.

And in the case of Lee and other confederate traitors... they were traitors first, and should not be glorified.

PeteEU said:

Nothing to do with a "free society". It has to do with allowing criminals running around openly without punishment.

The KKK and others were openly breaking the laws by murdering and preventing the black population in doing basic things.. like voting. The Federal government did nothing, because (much like now), it was infested with pro Nazi types. It was highly anti-semitic, and pro white. The US was the cradle of eugenics and that policy actually got into laws, that later would allow the death of millions.

So it is time for the US to say "listen.. our past is full of racism and anti-Semitic values and now we will deal with it". Tearing down the statues and plagues is one of the steps. You dont forget what happened, because we have books.. yea books, the thing that Neo Nazis love to burn so they can change history to fit in their wacked out world view.

Defending Neo Nazis and the KKK is supporting them.. it has nothing to do with free speech, as you cant have free speech if you are defending peoples who want to take away the right to free speech.. yes that is what the Nazi Trump scum want to do.

And in the case of Lee and other confederate traitors... they were traitors first, and should not be glorified.

Click to expand...

Take a deep breath first there is nothing illegal about honoring confederate leaders with statues and that is indeed the very heart of free speech and a free society.

As far as boo

BillRM said:

Take a deep breath first there is nothing illegal about honoring confederate leaders with statues and that is indeed the very heart of free speech and a free society.

As far as boo

Click to expand...

Sorry my editing cause my above posting to be cut short so once more.

Take a deep breath first there is nothing illegal about honoring confederate leaders with statues and that is indeed the very heart of free speech and a free society.

Now I would strongly suggest you begin reading the books written by the men who fought that war on both sides as you seem to have a very one dimension and emotional understanding of that conflict.

You might wish to start with US Grant memoirs and Jefferson Davis book The Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government and go on from there.

US Grant set a fine example from the very start of the peace.

"When news of the surrender first reached our lines our men commenced firing a salute of a hundred guns in honor of the victory. I at once sent word, however, to have it stopped. The Confederates were now our prisoners, and we did not want to exult over their downfall."
Ulysses S. Grant, April 9, 1865, Personal Memoirs of U. S. Grant (New York, 1885), pages 555-560.

Click to expand...

Footnote I tend to agree that the federal government should had been slower in turning the control of the state governments back to the whites and should have keep the freeman bureau going for a few generations to better protected and insure the rights of black population in the south.

But in no way at their very worst was the southerns the same as the nazis.

BillRM said:

Take a deep breath first there is nothing illegal about honoring confederate leaders with statues and that is indeed the very heart of free speech and a free society.

As far as boo

Click to expand...

I see..so honouring traitors is now the basis of US society... mass murdering traitors... good to know.

PeteEU said:

I see..so honouring traitors is now the basis of US society... mass murdering traitors... good to know.

Click to expand...

No free speech is (one of the basis) of US society. And that comes at the cost of being subjected to speech that you don't like.

I agree with you - Lee and co. were traitors and should be treated as such. They deserve no monuments. But as I said in a free society I have to put up with speech that I don't like. That's the cost for me to to be able to espouse ideas that others may not like. Eventually bad ideas get called out as such and get discarded - as you can see with Confederate monuments being taken down now. It may not happen as quickly as you like but democracies and free societies are messy and slow to change

Gaius46 said:

No free speech is (one of the basis) of US society. And that comes at the cost of being subjected to speech that you don't like.

Click to expand...

Statues have nothing to do with free speech.

And where was free speech for the black population under the Confederacy and even after under the KKK terror and segregation?

I agree with you - Lee and co. were traitors and should be treated as such. They deserve no monuments. But as I said in a free society I have to put up with speech that I don't like. That's the cost for me to to be able to espouse ideas that others may not like. Eventually bad ideas get called out as such and get discarded - as you can see with Confederate monuments being taken down now. It may not happen as quickly as you like but democracies and free societies are messy and slow to change

Click to expand...

There is no such thing as free speech. The US censors free speech daily in the name of morality, so dont come here and say there is free speech. You have the right to say what you want, but then you have to accept the consequences of those words/actions.

If you show nudity on TV, that is free speech, but the tv channels censor that because else they will be fined.. that is censorship.

So why can Trump Neo Nazi racist spew their hate without consquences? As soon as a Muslim radical spews their hate, then the right especially is all over them and wanting their heads and often they are put in prison for it under the "support of terror" mantra. Why not apply that to Trump Neo Nazi scum? They have after all killed far more people and more often than any Muslims since 9/11 and one could argue in US history.

PeteEU said:

I see..so honouring traitors is now the basis of US society... mass murdering traitors... good to know.

Click to expand...

Traitors such as washington and jefferson and franklin and so forth?

I refer you to the US Declaration of Independence where it state that a people have a right and even a duty to change governments when there is a need to do so in their opinion.

The south rightly or wrongly was exercising that freedom in the same manner as the founding fathers did.

http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/

BillRM said:

Traitors such as washington and jefferson and franklin and so forth?

Click to expand...

So are there mass amount of statues in the UK for these men?

I refer you to the US Declaration of Independence where it state that a people have a right and even a duty to change governments when there is a need to do so in their opinion.

The south rightly or wrongly was exercising that freedom in the same manner as the founding fathers did.

The Declaration of Independence: Full text

Click to expand...

Has nothing to do with the US constitution. The Confederacy were a bunch of traitors to that constitution and hence committed treason. There should be no statues glorifying those monsters..

PeteEU said:

Statues have nothing to do with free speech.

.

Click to expand...

What a complete nonsensible statement as putting up statues or burning a flag or .........are all protected acts under the first amendment.

PeteEU said:

So are there mass amount of statues in the UK for these men?


Has nothing to do with the US constitution. The Confederacy were a bunch of traitors to that constitution and hence committed treason. There should be no statues glorifying those monsters..

Click to expand...

Monsters????????

So the founding fathers was slave owning monsters also and if not why not?

Footnote if the colonies had still been under the Empire slavery would had ended at least thirty years earlier then it did.

it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Click to expand...

Due to them winning their war with the aid of France, is that the only reason that unlike the southerns they are not monsters?

BillRM said:

What a complete nonsensible statement as putting up statues or burning a flag or .........are all protected acts under the first amendment.

Click to expand...

And show your tit on TV is against it?

PeteEU said:

Statues have nothing to do with free speech.

And where was free speech for the black population under the Confederacy and even after under the KKK terror and segregation?



There is no such thing as free speech. The US censors free speech daily in the name of morality, so dont come here and say there is free speech. You have the right to say what you want, but then you have to accept the consequences of those words/actions.

If you show nudity on TV, that is free speech, but the tv channels censor that because else they will be fined.. that is censorship.

So why can Trump Neo Nazi racist spew their hate without consquences? As soon as a Muslim radical spews their hate, then the right especially is all over them and wanting their heads and often they are put in prison for it under the "support of terror" mantra. Why not apply that to Trump Neo Nazi scum? They have after all killed far more people and more often than any Muslims since 9/11 and one could argue in US history.

Click to expand...

Statues are a form of artistic expression. Under US law artistic expression is speech. Getting away from the law are you seriously going to argue that paintings and other forms of artwork are not forms of expression?

As regards the black population under the Confederacy that has nothing to do with speech. They weren't considered citizens (or even human) by the Confederacy. You want to discuss the attitude of southerners towards black people during the Confederacy we certainly can and you and I would violently agree. But it isn't a free speech argument.

Why shouldn't they be allowed to spew their nonsense? Why shouldn't the people be able to listen to what they say and judge for themselves? As you can clearly see the vast majority of the country disagrees with them. What's the alternative? Having some fool of a Congressman decide for me what I can and cannot listen to? Have him do my thinking for me? No thanks. I'm a big boy and can figure it out on my own. The wanna be asshole Nazis are a fringe element and will always remain one. In the larger scheme of things they are nothing more than an annoyance.

There is no such thing as a limitless freedom. I am allowed to say whatever I wish but I am not free from consequences. I cannot libel you. That's a limit on free speech and it's a wholly appropriate one. That doesn't mean we get it right all the time. Public TV censorship of foul language and nudity are good examples of that. But even that is changing over time.

BillRM said:

Traitors such as washington and jefferson and franklin and so forth?

I refer you to the US Declaration of Independence where it state that a people have a right and even a duty to change governments when there is a need to do so in their opinion.

The south rightly or wrongly was exercising that freedom in the same manner as the founding fathers did.

The Declaration of Independence: Full text

Click to expand...

Traitor is in the eye of the beholder. I doubt you'll find statues of Washington in London.

The United States won the Civil War. The Confederate States of America no longer exists and from the perspective of the United States Lee and Jefferson Davis and all the rest are traitors.