• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Judge voids UNC's settlement with Sons of Traitorous Racists

Master Debator

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 22, 2019
Messages
9,384
Reaction score
3,447
Judge Voids UNC’s $2.5 Million Settlement with the Sons of Confederate Veterans over Silent Sam

On Wednesday, the Orange County, North Carolina, Superior Court Judge Allen Baddour ruled that the Sons of Confederate Veterans had no standing to sue the state's university system over Silent Sam, the statue of a Confederate soldier at the center of the dispute. Under the now-invalidated agreement, the university system had agreed to pay $2.5 million to a trust under the control of the Sons of Confederate Veterans to preserve and display Silent Sam somewhere outside its original location on the Chapel Hill campus. The Sons of Confederate Veterans could use the money to build a facility dedicated just to housing Silent Sam under the agreements terms. According to the News & Observer, the UNC system had struck that deal before the group had moved to file a lawsuit.

Many students and faculty expressed outrage at the settlement because it allowed for the preservation of a symbol of white supremacy and enriched a group known for pushing a Lost Cause rewriting of Civil War history. Some large donors pulled their donations to the university. Students and faculty marched in protest and complained that the university's decision had placed students and others on campus in danger.

Many also complained about the secretive conditions under which the deal was struck. According to the News & Observer, the Sons of Confederate Veterans had first reached out to the UNC system to threaten legal action to force the monument to be kept on campus. The group then offered to erect the monument elsewhere if the university would agree to pay for the transportation, repair, maintenance, security, and public display of the monument. The group asked for $5 million, and 19 out of the 20 board members at that meeting agreed (the one dissenting vote came from a man who had called for the statue to be returned to its place on campus). Eventually, that sum was reduced to $2.5 million. According to ABC 11, some of that money has already been used.


Good job on this judge in vacating that ridiculous settlement. The Sons of Traitorous Racists have no right to demand anyone pay them to preserve statues of their older dead racist relatives. Hopefully the university can sic some loan sharks on these admitted sons of traitors to reclaim the money they already spent. The dead beats probably dont have much more than mobile homes in the way of assets but we'll take it I guess.

:shrug:
 
Silent Sam didn't own any slaves. He just didn't like the idea of foreigners invading his homeland so he fought back.

You had to be pretty well off to own a slave.

The situation was complicated back then. SJWs are looking at the whole think like it's black and white.
 
Silent Sam didn't own any slaves. He just didn't like the idea of foreigners invading his homeland so he fought back.

You had to be pretty well off to own a slave.

The situation was complicated back then. SJWs are looking at the whole think like it's black and white.

You didn’t have to be well off to benefit from slavery though, and considering the horrific abuses inflicted on African Americans long after the Civil War under Jim Crow the fantasy that it was the Confederates who were the victims of the war is rather pathetic.

Especially since the Confederacy explicitly seceded over slavery.
 
Good job on this judge in vacating that ridiculous settlement. The Sons of Traitorous Racists have no right to demand anyone pay them to preserve statues of their older dead racist relatives. Hopefully the university can sic some loan sharks on these admitted sons of traitors to reclaim the money they already spent. The dead beats probably dont have much more than mobile homes in the way of assets but we'll take it I guess.

:shrug:

Hysterics aside I don't see how the Sons of Confederate Veterans would have grounds to sue if the statue belongs to the university. It would like me suing my neighbor because they got rid of their porch swing, patio furniture or some of their other property.
 
Silent Sam didn't own any slaves.
"Silent Sam" wasn't an actual human being. The statue is a general representation of Confederate soldiers.


He just didn't like the idea of foreigners invading his homeland so he fought back.
That's complete bull****.

The Confederate states left the union and waged war because they wanted to maintain and perpetuate slavery. They were very open and explicit about that fact. Why aren't you?

The Unionists weren't "foreigners." Secession had no basis whatsoever in the Constitution, and was flat-out illegal and treasonous.


The situation was complicated back then.
Many aspects of the Civil War were complicated, sure. But the fact that the southern states attempted to secede because of slavery? That's pretty simple.
 
Silent Sam didn't own any slaves. He just didn't like the idea of foreigners invading his homeland so he fought back.

You had to be pretty well off to own a slave.

The situation was complicated back then. SJWs are looking at the whole think like it's black and white.

The only SJWs around here are those who can't accept the truth about the racist traitors who's statues litter our nation.
 
"Silent Sam" wasn't an actual human being. The statue is a general representation of Confederate soldiers.

Would the average confederate soldier been rich enough to own slaves?


That's complete bull****.

I doubt the average confederate soldier back then could afford slaves. So them fighting for slavery would amount to Americans today fighting so companies can continue to outsource or hire illegal aliens instead of employing American citizens.Slavery was used so that the rich who owned the plantations and companies didn't have to hire freed Americans. So the average soldier most likely didn't benefit from slavery.

I also doubt that most Union troops gave a rats ass about freeing the slaves.To them it was probably a war they didn't want to fight and die in.


I am sure that to the high ranking Confederate officers who were rich enough to own slaves, the rich who weaseled their way out of military service and the politicians in their back pocket that was probably true. To most of the troops doing the actual fighting it probably had more to do with keeping foreigners out his homeland. After all the average person back then didn't own slaves and slaves worked jobs that freed men could be getting paid to do.
 
Last edited:
Maybe the Sons can get private support to build a facility for Silent Sam.

Of course, the names of contributors would have to be kept secret.
 
The situation was complicated back then. SJWs are looking at the whole think like it's black and white.

I'd like to see you find a worse choice of words.
 
Would the average confederate soldier been rich enough to own slaves?
Historical estimates are that 1 in 10 Confederate soldiers directly owned slave. That was double the rate of the rest of the South.

Anyway, those other 9 out of 10 soldiers? Yep, they were fighting to maintain slavery. Again! The states were explicit that was their goal in seceding.

From Mississippi's declaration of secession, right at the start:
Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization.

South Carolina:
For twenty-five years this agitation has been steadily increasing, until it has now secured to its aid the power of the common Government. Observing the forms of the Constitution, a sectional party has found within that Article establishing the Executive Department, the means of subverting the Constitution itself. 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 "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.

Discussions of slavery are all over the declarations by Georgia, Texas, Virgina as well. (The Declaration of Causes of Seceding States | American Battlefield Trust)

The issue of slavery dominated public discussion, law, debate and politics for decades before it resulted in a war. It was a major factor and point of discussion in the 1860 election (e.g. Lincoln's "House Divided" speech, referenced in the SC declaration above).

Southern whites firmly believed that the South would face an economic and social disaster if slavery was abolished; among other factors, they were terrified that ending slavery would unleash blacks, resulting in widespread murder and rape, not to mention dilute the political power of whites. That's why before the war, they were constantly pushing to ensure that any new states added to the US allowed slavery, because they knew if those new states abolished slavery, it would be harder to maintain it in the slave states.

The Confederate Army used slaves to transport goods and build defenses; they captured escaped slaves to return them to their "owners;" they must have known that the official policy was to murder any captured black soldiers for "servile insurrection," as they carried out those orders.

In 1865, the Confederates were losing badly. In discussions about whether to conscript slaves into war, Senator Hunter (VA) said “What did we go to war for, if not to protect our property?” (He wasn't talking about land, he was talking about people.) Confederate soldiers referred to protecting slavery in their letters.

Again: Southerners thoroughly believed that slavery was justifiable. Thus and again, they did not try to hide the fact that they were fighting to maintain slavery. Why are you?


I also doubt that most Union troops gave a rats ass about freeing the slaves.To them it was probably a war they didn't want to fight and die in.
Thanks for completely undercutting your own point.

Union soldiers' views ran the full gamut from racist to abolitionist. There was certainly plenty of racism in the North. However, they pretty much all knew that a primary cause of the Civil War was the dispute over slavery, and that if the North won, slavery would be outlawed throughout the US.

Again... The topic was disputed for decades. The 1860 election was a referendum on slavery. The Emancipation Proclamation made it clear that slavery was a key factor. It wasn't a secret.

It's downright routine for soldiers to fight not for their own personal benefit, but for the interests of their leaders. I could literally be here all day listing wars where the rank and file soldiers were fighting for causes that had nothing to do with them.
 
Historical estimates are that 1 in 10 Confederate soldiers directly owned slave.


Sure those were probably commissioned officers.While the 90% that didn't were enlisted personnel forced to serve.


Anyway, those other 9 out of 10 soldiers? Yep, they were fighting to maintain slavery.

Their goal was probably to stay alive and keep northerners from ****ing up their land.They were mostly the poor were forced to enlist.

Again! The states were explicit that was their goal in seceding.

Sure the goal of the wealthy who were able to own slaves and the politicians in their pockets.


Union soldiers' views ran the full gamut from racist to abolitionist. There was certainly plenty of racism in the North. However, they pretty much all knew that a primary cause of the Civil War was the dispute over slavery, and that if the North won, slavery would be outlawed throughout the US.

Union soldiers like their Confederate counterparts were forcibly conscripted.


It's downright routine for soldiers to fight not for their own personal benefit, but for the interests of their leaders. I could literally be here all day listing wars where the rank and file soldiers were fighting for causes that had nothing to do with them.

If you mean drafted to fight in war they did't want then sure you are right. But that was the nature of warfare since warfare started. Leaders want something from another territory and basically forced their subjects into participation.
 
Back
Top Bottom