• 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!

Confederate statue compromise

Replace Confederate statues with statues of Lincoln?

  • Yes, Lincoln deserves to be honored

    Votes: 8 44.4%

  • Yes, the Republicans are the party of Lincoln

    Votes: 2 11.1%

  • Well, i guess it is still history

    Votes: 1 5.6%

  • No. **** Lincoln.

    Votes: 7 38.9%
  • Total voters
    18
slick said:
I'll refer to two of the top echelon of our presidents after that war who have a different viewpoint:

Guess who Eisenhower , a hero 5 star general & always considered a top 10 president, had a picture most
prominently displayed in the Oval Office throughout his 8 years in office? Robert E. Lee.
Renderings of traitors are not prominently displayed in the oval office to my knowledge.

In 1960 Eisenhower wrote:

General Robert E. Lee was, in my estimation, one of the supremely gifted men produced by our Nation. He believed unswervingly
in the Constitutional validity of his cause which until 1865 was still an arguable question in America; he was a poised and inspiring
leader, true to the high trust reposed in him by millions of his fellow citizens; he was thoughtful yet demanding of his officers and men,
forbearing with captured enemies but ingenious, unrelenting and personally courageous in battle, and never disheartened by a
reverse or obstacle. Through all his many trials, he remained selfless almost to a fault and unfailing in his faith in God. Taken altogether,
he was noble as a leader and as a man, and unsullied as I read the pages of our history.

From deep conviction, I simply say this: a nation of men of Lee’s calibre would be unconquerable in spirit and soul. Indeed,
to the degree that present-day American youth will strive to emulate his rare qualities, including his devotion to this land
as revealed in his painstaking efforts to help heal the Nation’s wounds once the bitter struggle was over, we, in our own time
of danger in a divided world, will be strengthened and our love of freedom sustained.
Such are the reasons that I proudly display the picture of this great American on my office wall.
Dwight D. Eisenhower in Defense of Robert E. Lee – Civil War Profiles

And how about FDR Remarking at the unveiling of a statue of General Robert E. Lee 1936.

'All over the United States we recognize him as a
great leader of men & a great general . But,
also, all over the United States I believe we recognize
him as much more than that.We recognize Robert E. Lee as one of
our greatest American Christians and one of our greatest American gentlemen’

Are traitors memorialized on US stamps? Robert E. Lee 5 times was, as was Thomas Jackson.
I'll take the side of FDR & Eisenhower any day as opposed to simpler minds.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure,Ike and FDR have been dead a long time.It's a different world.
 
Mizzy22 said:
How could the Confederacy exist?They had no land?The Confederracy existed only in the minds of the treasonous.
Click to expand...

Yes they did... The Confederacy consisted of:
South Carolina
Mississippi
Florida
Alabama
Georgia
Louisiana
Texas
Virginia
Arkansas
Tennessee
North Carolina

The US government did not carry any jurisdiction in these states, for example no slaves were freed after the issuance of the Emancipation Proclamation (they were only freed later in US occupied lands in the CSA and the rest at the end of the war) because the US had no legal control over these states. There was a Confederate government made up of a court system, Congress (Confederate Senate and House of Representatives), and executive (President Jefferson Davis). The government issued laws, levied taxes, issued currency, and held foreign diplomatic relationships similar to any other nation.
 
nymillennial said:
Yes they did... The Confederacy consisted of:
South Carolina
Mississippi
Florida
Alabama
Georgia
Louisiana
Texas
Virginia
Arkansas
Tennessee
North Carolina

The US government did not carry any jurisdiction in these states, for example no slaves were freed after the issuance of the Emancipation Proclamation (they were only freed later in US occupied lands in the CSA and the rest at the end of the war) because the US had no legal control over these states. There was a Confederate government made up of a court system, Congress (Confederate Senate and House of Representatives), and executive (President Jefferson Davis). The government issued laws, levied taxes, issued currency, and held foreign diplomatic relationships similar to any other nation.
Click to expand...

Those were 11 States of the United States of America.In rebellion, at no time,not for a single second did they stop being States in the United States of America.
 
nymillennial said:
Yes they did... The Confederacy consisted of:
South Carolina
Mississippi
Florida
Alabama
Georgia
Louisiana
Texas
Virginia
Arkansas
Tennessee
North Carolina

The US government did not carry any jurisdiction in these states, for example no slaves were freed after the issuance of the Emancipation Proclamation (they were only freed later in US occupied lands in the CSA and the rest at the end of the war) because the US had no legal control over these states. There was a Confederate government made up of a court system, Congress (Confederate Senate and House of Representatives), and executive (President Jefferson Davis). The government issued laws, levied taxes, issued currency, and held foreign diplomatic relationships similar to any other nation.
Click to expand...

Why are you Confederate sympathizers always Conservative and Trump supporters?
 
Mizzy22 said:
Why are you Confederate sympathizers always Conservative and Trump supporters?
Click to expand...

1) I am not a Confederate sympathizer, I called their atrocities disgusting and evil in the thread.
2) They did cease to be a part of the US, as they formed their own internationally recognized government independent of that of the United States.
3) The Confederacy and Civil War is an important part of American and global history.
4) I never told you my opinion of Trump, you just assumed it.
 
nymillennial said:
1) I am not a Confederate sympathizer, I called their atrocities disgusting and evil in the thread.
2) They did cease to be a part of the US, as they formed their own internationally recognized government independent of that of the United States.
3) The Confederacy and Civil War is an important part of American and global history.
4) I never told you my opinion of Trump, you just assumed it.
Click to expand...

The Confederate States had to win the war,to stop being part of the USA,that didn't happen.
 
Mizzy22 said:
The Confederate States had to win the war,to stop being part of the USA,that didn't happen.
Click to expand...

True, they did to have to remain independent, but they were independent during the war, for all the reasons I described in the thread. And regardless they still played a crucial historical role. There is no benefit to removing historical momuments.
 
nymillennial said:
True, they did to have to remain independent, but they were independent during the war, for all the reasons I described in the thread. And regardless they still played a crucial historical role. There is no benefit to removing historical momuments.
Click to expand...

Maybe in the South,they thought they were a nation,not in the North.
So you wouldn't have a issue with historical monuments of Hitler,Goring,Himmler in Germany?
 
Mizzy22 said:
Maybe in the South,they thought they were a nation,not in the North.
So you wouldn't have a issue with historical monuments of Hitler,Goring,Himmler in Germany?
Click to expand...

No, as I have stated before (and actually used Nazi Germany and the USSR as alternative examples) the threats to such monuments are unjustified. They are an important part of our history and should be preserved for future generations to observe, study, and learn from. Monuments are symbols, symbols that help to understand a different time period, symbols that have significant meaning from their time. I do have a problem with Nazi ideology and the endorsement of it, a serious problem with that, but I fully support keeping these important pieces of history standing.

nymillennial said:
But all history matters, not just the history you agree with. Many remnants of Confederate, USSR, Nazi, and other unfavorable history are under threat due to people being offended by them. While any sane person can agree the atrocities committed in regimes such as the ones I listed above were absolutely horrifying and evil, the history behind them remains very crucial, not to glorify them but to learn from them.
Click to expand...
 
nymillennial said:
No, as I have stated before (and actually used Nazi Germany and the USSR as alternative examples) the threats to such monuments are unjustified. They are an important part of our history and should be preserved for future generations to observe, study, and learn from. Monuments are symbols, symbols that help to understand a different time period, symbols that have significant meaning from their time. I do have a problem with Nazi ideology and the endorsement of it, a serious problem with that, but I fully support keeping these important pieces of history standing.
Click to expand...

You have problems with Nazis.
But a so called nation founded on keeping a third of it's citizens in forced bondage,no problem?
 
Mizzy22 said:
You have problems with Nazis.
But a so called nation founded on keeping a third of it's citizens in forced bondage,no problem?
Click to expand...

I have said this over and over. I do have a problem with the principles of the Confederacy (namely slavery) but that does not mean we should remove historical monuments relating to it. Unlike you, I do not believe we should remove valuable pieces of history just because I disagree with the values of that society, the history that caused slavery in the Confederacy, the Holocaust in Nazi Germany, mass starvation in the USSR, are all important and those statues are a part of that history. So yes I have a problem with Nazis, Confederates, and all those who oppress their citizens but the monuments are still important nevertheless for their historical value.
 
nymillennial said:
I have said this over and over. I do have a problem with the principles of the Confederacy (namely slavery) but that does not mean we should remove historical monuments relating to it. Unlike you, I do not believe we should remove valuable pieces of history just because I disagree with the values of that society, the history that caused slavery in the Confederacy, the Holocaust in Nazi Germany, mass starvation in the USSR, are all important and those statues are a part of that history. So yes I have a problem with Nazis, Confederates, and all those who oppress their citizens but the monuments are still important nevertheless for their historical value.
Click to expand...

You can't be pro-Confederate monuments,and anti-Nazi monuments at the same time.
It's hypocritical.
 
Mizzy22 said:
You can't be pro-Confederate monuments,and anti-Nazi monuments at the same time.
It's hypocritical.
Click to expand...

I'm not, I never said that. I am pro-all monuments, what I have repeatedly said is that I disagree with Nazis and Confederates for their atrocities but both Nazi and Confederate monuments have important historical value and deserve to stay up.

nymillennial said:
Unlike you, I do not believe we should remove valuable pieces of history just because I disagree with the values of that society, the history that caused slavery in the Confederacy, the Holocaust in Nazi Germany, mass starvation in the USSR, are all important and those statues are a part of that history. So yes I have a problem with Nazis, Confederates, and all those who oppress their citizens but the monuments are still important nevertheless for their historical value.
Click to expand...

nymillennial said:
No, as I have stated before (and actually used Nazi Germany and the USSR as alternative examples) the threats to such monuments are unjustified. They are an important part of our history and should be preserved for future generations to observe, study, and learn from. Monuments are symbols, symbols that help to understand a different time period, symbols that have significant meaning from their time. I do have a problem with Nazi ideology and the endorsement of it, a serious problem with that, but I fully support keeping these important pieces of history standing.
Click to expand...
 
nymillennial said:
I'm not, I never said that. I am pro-all monuments, what I have repeatedly said is that I disagree with Nazis and Confederates for their atrocities but both Nazi and Confederate monuments have important historical value and deserve to stay up.
Click to expand...

Where in Berlin do you think they should build the Hitler Monument?
 
Mizzy22 said:
Where in Berlin do you think they should build the Hitler Monument?
Click to expand...

You do realize there is a difference between keeping current historical monuments up and building new monuments right?
 
nymillennial said:
You do realize there is a difference between keeping current historical monuments up and building new monuments right?
Click to expand...

The reason there isn't a Hitler monument in Berlin,is the same reason,the racist monuments are coming down.
 
Mizzy22 said:
The reason there isn't a Hitler monument in Berlin,is the same reason,the racist monuments are coming down.
Click to expand...

So because people are triggered? If it offends someone it should come down? History doesn't matter because someone doesn't like it? In that case any point in history could be scrapped? The atrocities of history are just as important as its accomplishments and should not be censored just because someone finds it racist or offensive. We learn from history or we're bound to repeat it. The removal of monuments are a part of the dangerous dystopian trend of the injection of PC culture into the mainstream. I suggest 1984 by George Orwell or Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury as good reads about this subject.
 
Mizzy22 said:
It was a political move
Click to expand...

Everything our elected officials do is political move. However it does't change the fact that Lincoln had sincere anti-slavery beliefs,a desire to end the wicked practice of slavery and he actually came through on abolishing slavery.
 
Mizzy22 said:
You have problems with Nazis.
But a so called nation founded on keeping a third of it's citizens in forced bondage,no problem?
Click to expand...

Slavery, Slavery, Slavery, you sound like a one trick pony!

Why Did Free Blacks Stay in the South? African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross

Racist monuments, get real! There were more free blacks in the south than there were in the north at the time the war began.
Henry Louis Gates, Obama's friend stated: In that raging year of Lincoln’s election and Southern secession, there were a total of
488,070 free blacks living in the United States, about 10 percent of the entire black population. Of those, 226,152 lived in the
North and 261,918 in the South, At no time before the Civil War (at least not after the first U.S. Census was taken in 1790 and
future states were added) did free blacks in the North ever outnumber those in the South! Many of these Southern Free
Negroes fought for the Confederacy,

Your notion seems to be that 'slaves resided below the Mason Dixon line and free black people above it, with every man,
woman and child in chains trying to escape to the North just as soon as they could — following the proverbial North Star
to a new life of unbounded opportunity — while those already up there remained vigilant against being kidnapped back into
slavery down in the South. Ira Berlin's Slaves Without Masters: a once-in-a-generation masterpiece of research and analysis —
shakes inherited “facts” to the point that one should no longer feel comfortable assuming anything about what was so in the black past'

The cruelty towards free blacks was as bad in the north as in the south. Slavery had become a southern affair, but bigotry was
truly an issue for all of America. The poor whites nationwide feared free black competition and arranged for numerous race laws
in the north and south both. Abraham Lincoln himself believed the racism was too deep seated to be dealt with, and so advocated
removing the blacks from the whole country, not just the south.

In a nutshell your feeble notion of:
Whose to bless? The noble & humane population of the north
Whose to blame? The vile pathological sadistic cruel slavers of the south

You ought to give this nonsense of a notion a much needed rest.
It's much more complicated
 
nymillennial said:
I'm not, I never said that. I am pro-all monuments, what I have repeatedly said is that I disagree with Nazis and Confederates for their atrocities but both Nazi and Confederate monuments have important historical value and deserve to stay up.
Click to expand...

Benedict Arnold had historical significance, we don't put up monuments for that traitor.
 
slick said:
Slavery, Slavery, Slavery, you sound like a one trick pony!

Why Did Free Blacks Stay in the South? African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross

Racist monuments, get real! There were more free blacks in the south than there were in the north at the time the war began.
Henry Louis Gates, Obama's friend stated: In that raging year of Lincoln’s election and Southern secession, there were a total of
488,070 free blacks living in the United States, about 10 percent of the entire black population. Of those, 226,152 lived in the
North and 261,918 in the South, At no time before the Civil War (at least not after the first U.S. Census was taken in 1790 and
future states were added) did free blacks in the North ever outnumber those in the South! Many of these Southern Free
Negroes fought for the Confederacy,

Your notion seems to be that 'slaves resided below the Mason Dixon line and free black people above it, with every man,
woman and child in chains trying to escape to the North just as soon as they could — following the proverbial North Star
to a new life of unbounded opportunity — while those already up there remained vigilant against being kidnapped back into
slavery down in the South. Ira Berlin's Slaves Without Masters: a once-in-a-generation masterpiece of research and analysis —
shakes inherited “facts” to the point that one should no longer feel comfortable assuming anything about what was so in the black past'

The cruelty towards free blacks was as bad in the north as in the south. Slavery had become a southern affair, but bigotry was
truly an issue for all of America. The poor whites nationwide feared free black competition and arranged for numerous race laws
in the north and south both. Abraham Lincoln himself believed the racism was too deep seated to be dealt with, and so advocated
removing the blacks from the whole country, not just the south.

In a nutshell your feeble notion of:
Whose to bless? The noble & humane population of the north
Whose to blame? The vile pathological sadistic cruel slavers of the south

You ought to give this nonsense of a notion a much needed rest.
It's much more complicated
Click to expand...

Could the free blacks in the south vote?
 
nymillennial said:
I have said this over and over. I do have a problem with the principles of the Confederacy (namely slavery) but that does not mean we should remove historical monuments relating to it. Unlike you, I do not believe we should remove valuable pieces of history just because I disagree with the values of that society, the history that caused slavery in the Confederacy, the Holocaust in Nazi Germany, mass starvation in the USSR, are all important and those statues are a part of that history. So yes I have a problem with Nazis, Confederates, and all those who oppress their citizens but the monuments are still important nevertheless for their historical value.
Click to expand...

These statues of the traitors are by and large not even from that era. They're monuments to Jim Crow, having been erected to cow local black populations decades after the Confederate treason was put down.

If you want to learn about the history of the early to mid 19th century read a book, don't try to glean it from 20th century stone odes to white supremacy.
 
Mizzy22 said:
Could the free blacks in the south vote?
Click to expand...

Murrin, John M.; Johnson, Paul E.; McPherson, James M.; Fahs, Alice; Gerstle, Gary (2012). Liberty, Equality, Power:
A History of the American People (6th ed.). Wadsworth, Cengage Learning. p. 296. ISBN 978-0-495-90499-1

https://books.google.com/books?id=FGSQOiy6uZUC&pg=PT337#v=onepage&q&f=true
Check out page 296 it gives the most info on that subject. Here is my take on the article.

1) the revolutionary constitutions of Mas., Maine, NH & Vermont states with very tiny black minorities
granted the vote to free blacks.
2) New York & North Carolina gave the vote to all men including propertied blacks
3) By 1840 Free blacks lost suffrage in NY, NJ, Maryland, Tenn & North Carolina.
4) Dred SScott case declared blacks were not citizens in 1857 so I'd say though
through the years a very small group of free blacks voted in both north & south
but it's my guess no blacks were able to vote for Lincoln in 1860.
 
slick said:
Murrin, John M.; Johnson, Paul E.; McPherson, James M.; Fahs, Alice; Gerstle, Gary (2012). Liberty, Equality, Power:
A History of the American People (6th ed.). Wadsworth, Cengage Learning. p. 296. ISBN 978-0-495-90499-1

https://books.google.com/books?id=FGSQOiy6uZUC&pg=PT337#v=onepage&q&f=true
Check out page 296 it gives the most info on that subject. Here is my take on the article.

1) the revolutionary constitutions of Mas., Maine, NH & Vermont states with very tiny black minorities
granted the vote to free blacks.
2) New York & North Carolina gave the vote to all men including propertied blacks
3) By 1840 Free blacks lost suffrage in NY, NJ, Maryland, Tenn & North Carolina.
4) Dred SScott case declared blacks were not citizens in 1857 so I'd say though
through the years a very small group of free blacks voted in both north & south
but it's my guess no blacks were able to vote for Lincoln in 1860.
Click to expand...

Without the vote,they weren't 100% free
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom