West Point moves to vanquish Confederate symbols from campus

[eman623]

I know

Lee was and should have been hung froma tree

Lee was a traitor but also a great man whose memory I and true Americans honor.

 

[vegas giants]

Lee was a traitor but also a great man whose memory I and true Americans honor.

At least you admit you honor a traitor to America


My standards are higher

 

[yankintx]

Lee broke the oath he gave as a cadet at West Point

Your sure have low leadership standards

 

[Tigerace117]

Duh. They don't celebrate the CSA.

Yes, they absolutely do.

As was the point of them being created in the first place.

Thankfully, steps were taken to remedy the issue.

 

[eman623]

Yes, they absolutely do.

No they don't

 

[Tigerace117]

No they don't

Yes, they do. There’s a reason so many. Confederate statues went up when Jim Crow was under threat.

 

[eman623]

Lee broke the oath he gave as a cadet at West Point

Your sure have low leadership standards

i have very high standards

history is complicated

 

[eman623]

Yes, they do. There’s a reason so many. Confederate statues went up when Jim Crow was under threat.

Name there that mention the CSA

 

[vegas giants]

i have very high standards

history is complicated

Not really

 

[Tigerace117]

Name there that mention the CSA

You want to try that one again in English?

 

[jpevans]

It's a fact that the left is rewriting history regarding the Civil War and attempting to stoke up anger and restart it.

In 1990, Ken Burns called Robert E Lee "great" and "America's favorite general". Now the left calls him a traitor and gets angry and nasty to anyone who dares disagree. Burns was forced to take back his earlier comments. But he was right the first time.

This is how far we've come to tearing the country apart in 32 years.

Shit, I thought Lee a Traitor since I was kneehigh to a racist.

 

[Ouroboros]

The Tariffs were not the reason why the South seceded. They actually wrote down and declared why they were breaking up the Union.

Blaming Tariffs is lost cause nonsense.

Nope, eliminating tariffs as a cause is just a Mad Lib way to oversimplify the history so that it seems all about race. That would only be true if the North went to war to free Black people, but there's no evidence for that except in Lib minds.

 

[Ouroboros]

What? Blacks were free in the north

Google "Black Codes in the North" and see what happens.

 

[vegas giants]

Google "Black Codes in the North" and see what happens.

But they were free....right?

 

[Ouroboros]

And your whining doesn't change the score on the scoreboard. Check it. You're losing badly. Step outside. Have a look.

Though you didn't intend your fatuous post to unpack the real agenda of the Libs on this thread, I appreciate that you have unwittingly been honest that you don't care about the history of the time, only what you think the effect of the Civil War on current history. That's why so many Lib losers resort to the "lost cause" accusation, because their fragile certainties are shaken by anyone who challenges them.

 

[Jezcoe]

Nope, eliminating tariffs as a cause is just a Mad Lib way to oversimplify the history so that it seems all about race. That would only be true if the North went to war to free Black people, but there's no evidence for that except in Lib minds.

The North didn’t go to war to free black people. They went to war to keep the Union together.

The south seceded over the issue of slavery.

Hope that helps.

 

[Ouroboros]

Give an example of the left rewriting history.

Give an example of Burns being called a traitor.

Meanwhile:

"While there are several difficulties with “The Civil War,” the fact remains that the entire production was written, directed and produced by white men with little in the way of historical training and few connections to academic historians. While undoubtedly masters of the mediums in which they were trained, biographer Geoffrey Ward, producer Ric Burns, and Ken Burns himself surely had blind spots and lacked the diverse perspectives necessary to convey the sheer magnitude and long-lasting impact of the war.

Many professional historians immediately took issue with “The Civil War,” and their concerns were published in a 1997 volume edited by Robert Brent Toplin. Featuring essays by some of the most well-known scholars of the day, including Eric Foner and C. Vann Woodward, with responses by Ken Burns and Geoffrey Ward, Ken Burns’s The Civil War: Historians Respond did little to lessen the continuing impact – indeed, the cultural and intellectual legacy – of the film itself."

Why We Need a New Civil War Documentary

The success and brilliance of the new PBS series on Reconstruction is a reminder of the missed opportunity facing the nation

www.smithsonianmag.com

It's hilarious that you asked for an example of the Left rewriting history and then provided one yourself, by subscribing to the nonsense that any historical take by "white men" must be problematic.

 

[Ouroboros]

Wow, the disgusting things you say are embarrassing. Either you are abjectly ignorant of 100 years of history or you are an amateur polemicist for white nationalism.

Americans generally had agreed to disagree on the Civil War until modern Leftists decided to submit history to their purity tests.

 

[Ouroboros]

But they were free....right?

Right, the same way that freed Blacks in the South were free.

 

[Ouroboros]

The North didn’t go to war to free black people. They went to war to keep the Union together.

The south seceded over the issue of slavery.

Hope that helps.

And for what reason did the North want to keep the Union together?

For their prosperity and security.

The same reasons the South valued slavery.

You Libs are okay with blathering abstractions when they come from Lincoln. But real people in any time don't go to war for abstractions.

 

[vegas giants]

Right, the same way that freed Blacks in the South were free.

But not many were....right?

 

[Ouroboros]

But not many were....right?

Your response must have sounded better in your head. Where Black Codes exist, Black people are only theoretically free, so prewar free Blacks are not especially better off that postwar free Blacks. You must know this, 'cause Joe Biden told everyone how Jim Crow is still alive and well, and Joe is never wrong on matters of racial equity.

 

[Jezcoe]

And for what reason did the North want to keep the Union together?

For their prosperity and security.

The same reasons the South valued slavery.

You Libs are okay with blathering abstractions when they come from Lincoln. But real people in any time don't go to war for abstractions.

They didn't go to war over an abstraction. The States were in rebellion. Those States fired the first shot against the Union and started the war.

Even if it didn't happen at Sumter, it would have happened eventually. The South had given up one of the more important laws that benefited it from the North... the Fugitive Slave Act. By leaving the Union it no longer had a right to compel the North to return runaway slaves. The border tensions from that and the fact that there are two expansionist nations vying for the same land... war would be inevitable and the result would have been the same.

The South would have lost.

 

[Ouroboros]

They didn't go to war over an abstraction. The States were in rebellion. Those States fired the first shot against the Union and started the war.

Even if it didn't happen at Sumter, it would have happened eventually. The South had given up one of the more important laws that benefited it from the North... the Fugitive Slave Act. By leaving the Union it no longer had a right to compel the North to return runaway slaves. The border tensions from that and the fact that there are two expansionist nations vying for the same land... war would be inevitable and the result would have been the same.

The South would have lost.

You're right on one thing: once the South exercised its right to secede, there would have been war eventually, though it would have been because Lincoln wanted those taxes. Had the governor of South Carolina allowed Lincoln to do whatever he wanted with Sumter, then Lincoln's next move would have been to gather taxes. History might not have viewed Lincoln the Tax-Gatherer as quite such a saint.

FYI, saying "the North went to war to save the Union" is an abstraction because it expunges the real world benefits the North got from the Union.

 

[Tigerace117]

You're right on one thing: once the South exercised its right to secede, there would have been war eventually, though it would have been because Lincoln wanted those taxes. Had the governor of South Carolina allowed Lincoln to do whatever he wanted with Sumter, then Lincoln's next move would have been to gather taxes. History might not have viewed Lincoln the Tax-Gatherer as quite such a saint.

FYI, saying "the North went to war to save the Union" is an abstraction because it expunges the real world benefits the North got from the Union.

Always funny watching the massive intellectual cowardice of Lost Causers. You lot can’t work up the courage to face the fact your heroes fought to defend slavery, so you invent all manner of silly fantasies to try and support your delusions.