Protesters destroy confederate monument in Durham

[Deleted]

They fought to protect slavery. You're surprised people are upset by having statues celebrating them?

Or are you doing the alt right feigned surprise thing?

I believe these men, of which 2 former US generals before te civil war, mainly defended their homelands. I have read my fair share of US civil war books back in thed ay and very few people even cared about the whole slave issue. Many in the South even agreed about ending slavery and often didn't have any themselves (or set them free before the war). Also, slavery was often used as an easy way to "sell" the War in the Union states because men needed a cause to fight and die for.
Btw, dont forget that General Lee was offered command of the Union forces before deciding to defend his home state instead.

And I was honestly surprised that all of the sudden these statues were a big deal even though they have been there for decades, often even pre-WW2.

I als don't believe any side really cares about the slavery backstory here. People are just unhappy and are looking to find/make a cause and start trouble.
People are easily triggered these days and you can apparently make them angry about almost anything, even a statue.

[Sama-81]

They fought to protect slavery. You're surprised people are upset by having statues celebrating them?

That's a ridculous stance, though. Not one iota more true than to say that, for example, the generals of the war of independence (including Washington) fought for the main reason of supporting treason.

[Deleted]

That's a ridculous stance, though. Not one iota more true than to say that, for example, the generals of the war of independence (including Washington) fought for the main reason of supporting treason.

What is a ridiculous stance?

[Sama-81]

What is a ridiculous stance?

That what they fought for, was to protect slavery. Sure, it's true in a sense, but no more true than that Washington fought to protect and aid traitors. Choosing that perspective to paint the overall picture of General Lee, would be literally no better than to chose the treason-perspective to paint the overall picture of General/President Washington. Or the founding fathers as a whole, for that matter, if we do the same with the confederate generals as a whole.

[Sama-81]

Deny history all you like. We have plenty of documentation that proves you are wrong about this.

I'm not denying anything. I'm saying that if they are remembered as such, it would be equally fair to remember the founding fathers, and President Washington, as a bunch of traitors. Pretending otherwise, now THAT would be denial of factual history.

Flase equivalencies are still false.

It's not an equivalence. It is however equal treatment, based on actions and choices made. Deny it all you wish, revisionism is a popular thing after all.

[Sama-81]

Wrong. The entire motivation for one was to continue slavery. The entire motivation of the other was to free the colonies from British rule. Read the various speeches and documents from the civil war that state the former fact in plain english. Keep denying that slavery was the primary motivation for secession though.

It most certainly wasn't the entire motivation, albeit a really big one (I'm hardly defending it), and the personal motivations for General Lee wasn't about slavery what-so-ever - don't you guys have history in school? It's your history, after all... And freeing people from British rule is a HILARIOUSLY partial viewpoint, they weren't treated worse than other British subjects. I'm not saying they did wrong in starting the war for independence, but the description of 'traitor' suits Washington EVERY BIT as well as Lee fighting for slavery. Every, single, bit as well.

[the game]

The entire motivation of the other was to free the colonies from British rule.

how is this not treason against england?

[Deleted]

It most certainly wasn't the entire motivation, albeit a really big one (I'm hardly defending it), and the personal motivations for General Lee wasn't about slavery what-so-ever - don't you guys have history in school?. And freeing people from British rule is a HILARIOUSLY partial viewpoint, they weren't treated worse than other British subjects. I'm not saying they did wrong in starting the war for independence, but the description of 'traitor' suits Washington EVERY BIT as well as Lee fighting for slavery. Every, single, bit as well.

Washington was a traitor to Britain, he wasn't a traitor to the USA which Lee was.

[Sama-81]

Washington was a traitor to Britain, he wasn't a traitor to the USA which Lee was.

True. Neither were more of a traitor than the other really, just to different parties. The label still fits every bit as well to either, as a factual unbiased statement.

- - - Updated - - -

It certainly was the primary motivation and the only universal one. They were treated worse than other British subjects, read your history. Lee owned slaves and fought for his right to keep them, read your history. Lee may have abstractly objected to slavery, but he fully supported the institution and fought to continue it. You can keep spouting talking points from the alt-right, but don't expect anyone with any actual knowledge of history to believe you.

As I said, it was a really big one - the biggest, in fact. They were actually not treated worse, I've obviously read more history than you. Lee ultimately made his choices on more or less the same basis as Washington - what he perceived as his patriotic duty. And I would never take talking points from the alt-right, but neither from someone with his understanding of history based in a biased rendition of the american war for independence. No room for patriotism in history, not if one wants to learn what actually happened at any rate.

[Vargur]

18 days without food isn't slavery ? fuck off. they may not have been forced to work to death but not eating for 18 days while still working ?? bullshit I wouldn't care either at the point if I was killed or whipped . the body needs sustenance daily to be able to work efficiently

Which post did you reply to?

[Sama-81]

If you don't think colonists were treated differently than other British citizens(not colonists) you don't know shit about history. And since we agree that the confederacy stands for slavery above all else what are we arguing about? There is zero reason to have memorials to men who fought to have the right to enslave others for their own financial benefit.

I've apparantly read more history than you, but then again it's a hobby of mine and I took quite a few classes at university. Stating that the war for independence was merely to 'protect and free oppressed colonists' is a reductionist view point to the degree of hilariousness (obviously). But I'm rather used to them by now, a lot of people do NOT want to see that war through impartial eyes. Hell, I've even gotten used to many Americans pretending that they would have won that war without France coming to their rescue.

Either way, you wish to hail Washington as a hero and liberator, and denounce Lee as someone fighting to protect slavery. Have it your way, and I'll keep on prefering unbiased and more complex, and thereby far more correct, perspectives.

[Logwyn]

Why, are you British?

It's a shame they were slave owners, but it's another thing to take up arms against your own countrymen.

If you care about that part of our history so much, but that stuff in a museum of losers. We don't need open tributes to traitors.

I think you missed the point. One person's patriot can be anthers traitor. Its all a matter of perspective.

[Venant]

I've apparantly read more history than you, but then again it's a hobby of mine and I took quite a few classes at university. Stating that the war for independence was merely to 'protect and free oppressed colonists' is a reductionist view point to the degree of hilariousness (obviously). But I'm rather used to them by now, a lot of people do NOT want to see that war through impartial eyes. Hell, I've even gotten used to many Americans pretending that they would have won that war without France coming to their rescue.

Either way, you wish to hail Washington as a hero and liberator, and denounce Lee as someone fighting to protect slavery. Have it your way, and I'll keep on prefering unbiased and more complex, and thereby far more correct, perspectives.

Since you are a student of history, perhaps you could explain to me why slavery in the United States seems to be one of the few long past historical events that is still heavily used for political purposes.

[Doctor Funkenstein]

Yeah, it does. If soldiers were 15 or so during the war, they'd be in their mid/late-70's in 1924. I'm not arguing his point, just the math.

1924-1860+15=79

So you're saying he's saying people were alive when the statue was erected? WTF is the point of stating that? What relevance, in any way shape or form, does that have to do with anything being discussed?

The only way his statement makes any sense is if people were alive today when the statue was erected. Not that even that means a damn thing, but it's the only thing that makes any sense. In which case the math is way wrong on top of it.

[cubby]

So you're saying he's saying people were alive when the statue was erected? WTF is the point of stating that? What relevance, in any way shape or form, does that have to do with anything being discussed?

The only way his statement makes any sense is if people were alive today when the statue was erected. Not that even that means a damn thing, but it's the only thing that makes any sense. In which case the math is way wrong on top of it.

I was merely correcting the notion that the math was wrong. His math was correct. I have comments on his larger point.

[Hooked]

I read they caught the main "perp" who will be charged with a felony. They will also seek felony charges against the rest of the lawless mob of vandals also.

[the game]

Meanwhile at my university we have a big stone vagina.

[Dreknar20]

I read they caught the main "perp" who will be charged with a felony. They will also seek felony charges against the rest of the lawless mob of vandals also.

this is what happens when people insists on snap chatting even their criminal actions

[Rhamses]

Update:

Hordes of people turn themselves in to police for taking down the statue:


https://mobile.twitter.com/celestehe...80488321544192

[Elegiac]

Update:

Hordes of people turn themselves in to police for taking down the statue:

Civil disobedience indeed. Thoreau would be proud.