Jump to content
270soft Forum

Confederate Statue Removal


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Conservative Elector 2 said:

I would disagree with the wording of "justified" and "a good fight". I certainly would not have argued for secession in the first place. However, the problem which I am concerned about most arises afterwards. If your state secedes, even against your will, what options do you have left? Going to the North with all your family is nearly impossible without money and connections. If you do not enlist in the CS army you might get shot anyway, so some might argue you and your family are most safe if you try to survive the war fighting. I don't make the point here for the CS general but for the ordinary farm boy.

Weren't the options similar when Hitler annexed Austria if you disagreed with him, and didn't want to join the Wehrmacht. How was that different, there.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Patine said:

Weren't the options similar when Hitler annexed Austria if you disagreed with him, and didn't want to join the Wehrmacht. How was that different, there.

It was indeed similar. That's the reason why I would not automatically condemn most grandfathers and great-grandfathers in Austria, ''just because'' they served in the Wehrmacht. I myself, can't imagine me serving in any army but if I had lived in the Second World War, I had probably become a deserter or a soldier in the Wehrmacht - fleeing to the Americans, British or French as soon as they had arrived, which might have not been good for my family as they would been persecuted probably...

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, vcczar said:

The Confederacy was an institution that fought to defend the right to enslaving human beings, among other things. A flag is a symbol for the ideas and ideals of a nation. As such the flag represents racism, especially among African-Americans that are descended from slaves.

Much truth here. Having said that, my major association with the Confederate flag growing up was the General Lee car in Dukes of Hazzard. So my primary association to it is with rebellion and fighting unjust authority.

What we associate with a flag - what we take it to mean - is up to us. Some associations are more natural than others, but you can't simply assume your primary association is others'. If someone wants to defend Confederate monuments, the first question I have is: "What does it mean to them?" Could mean all sorts of things. If a community wants a Confederate statue, my question is: "What is the symbolism for them?"

Similarly, if Seattleites want to have a statue of V. Lenin, my question is: "What does this statue mean to them?" If that community takes it to mean certain things, and those are broadly respectable aspects of the man, then I would say "Fine," despite my not liking V. Lenin.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

Much truth here. Having said that, my major association with the Confederate flag growing up was the General Lee car in Dukes of Hazzard. So my primary association to it is with rebellion and fighting unjust authority.

I used to watch that show as a kid. I even had the toy of the car. When I was about 5 years old I had Dukes of Hazzard, Star Wars, A-Team, He-Man, WWF Wrestling, Legos, and a few other toys from that era. I ended up being a huge fan of GI Joe toys, but I was 7 or 8 until I got those. At this early age, I didn't associate the Confederate flag with anything. I think he was just the Dukes of Hazzard emblem until I was about 7 or 8, whenever I started reading about the Civil War.

2 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

Similarly, if Seattleites want to have a statue of V. Lenin, my question is: "What does this statue mean to them?" If that community takes it to mean certain things, and those are broadly respectable aspects of the man, then I would say "Fine," despite my not liking V. Lenin.

Statues of Lenin, Stalin, or anyone that ordered executions of innocent people and political opponents should be removed. 

In Dallas, where I was born, their was a hamburger place called Goff's, which had a Lenin statue outside of the restaurant. However, it faced the direction of Russia and had "We won" etched in on the base of the pedestal. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, vcczar said:

In Dallas, where I was born, their was a hamburger place called Goff's, which had a Lenin statue outside of the restaurant. However, it faced the direction of Russia and had "We won" etched in on the base of the pedestal. 

👍

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, vcczar said:

Statues of Lenin, Stalin, or anyone that ordered executions of innocent people and political opponents should be removed. 

In Dallas, where I was born, their was a hamburger place called Goff's, which had a Lenin statue outside of the restaurant. However, it faced the direction of Russia and had "We won" etched in on the base of the pedestal. 

I am so glad to hear an American say this, so many young people there seem to be completely ignorant of the true nature of communism.  It blows my mind thinking that there are some Americans, whos cushy society is completely funded by entrepreneurship and capitalism, that somehow think that communism is a "good" or "ideal" society.  The same ones professing the virtues of abhorrent ideologies such as Stalinism, Maoism, and Leninism would be the same ones executed immediately after the "revolution" was finished.  Can't have an angry mob tearing down the new government after all....

I really wish that more Americans would leave their country to realize how good they have it compared to the rest of the world.  Yes, the US has many problems, but take a trip to Cuba (even they allow private enterprise there now after their sugar daddy, the USSR, collapsed lol), North Korea, or some other former communist regions of the world and let me know if that is a life that you would like to live in.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, CPE said:

I am so glad to hear an American say this, so many young people there seem to be completely ignorant of the true nature of communism.  It blows my mind thinking that there are some Americans, whos cushy society is completely funded by entrepreneurship and capitalism, that somehow think that communism is a "good" or "ideal" society.  The same ones professing the virtues of abhorrent ideologies such as Stalinism, Maoism, and Leninism would be the same ones executed immediately after the "revolution" was finished.  Can't have an angry mob tearing down the new government after all....

I really wish that more Americans would leave their country to realize how good they have it compared to the rest of the world.  Yes, the US has many problems, but take a trip to Cuba (even they allow private enterprise there now after their sugar daddy, the USSR, collapsed lol), North Korea, or some other former communist regions of the world and let me know if that is a life that you would like to live in.

Let me elaborate on this by stating that I have a strong dislike of Communism, but I have a strong like of Socialism, at least in the Scandinavian forms of Socialism and in the quasi-Socialistic governments of Western and Central Europe, and possibly in Canada (I know less about Canada than I do about Europe). My opinion on Capitalism is more favorable than not, but I am more critical of capitalism than I am about Socialism---mainly because I favor systems that aim for the many rather than for the few. I think that capitalism and socialism are mutually beneficial to one another to cover their respective weaknesses. I also think that we are yet to find a better system than these two so far; however, I think it is possible that something greater will emerge in the future, be it 50, 100, or 250 years from now. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, CPE said:

I am so glad to hear an American say this, so many young people there seem to be completely ignorant of the true nature of communism.  It blows my mind thinking that there are some Americans, whos cushy society is completely funded by entrepreneurship and capitalism, that somehow think that communism is a "good" or "ideal" society.  The same ones professing the virtues of abhorrent ideologies such as Stalinism, Maoism, and Leninism would be the same ones executed immediately after the "revolution" was finished.  Can't have an angry mob tearing down the new government after all....

I really wish that more Americans would leave their country to realize how good they have it compared to the rest of the world.  Yes, the US has many problems, but take a trip to Cuba (even they allow private enterprise there now after their sugar daddy, the USSR, collapsed lol), North Korea, or some other former communist regions of the world and let me know if that is a life that you would like to live in.

Although certainly not a Communist, myself, and realizing the failure of such a system, I must point out the damage, ruin, corruption, and lack of integrity and death toll by completely unnecessary and avoidable causes that unregulated (or poorly regulated, or plutocratic-by-graft-and-bribery) Corporatism has also wrought on much of the world. I would even be so bold as to say it's completely and utterly failed as a system as thoroughly as Communism - it's just that the tiny percentage TRULY benefiting refuse to allow it fall, or be replaced, or viewed commonly as even having any viable or workable alternatives, and the hugely disproportionate resources they have allow them to keep their Regime of Mammon going in it's highly dysfunctional form. Regulation - a lot of more of it than many are led to believe is needed or should be allowed - needs to be levied on all aspects of business - labour, consumer protection, anti-trust, integrity, advertising standards, taxation, and others - especially punishing corruption and graft - to make things actual work. And it's government that needs to get a backbone and do this - because, despite the myth and urban legend, market competition will not, and has proven not to, do so itself - it also makes things worse. Also, a social safety is NECESSARY for a society, especially a wealthy one, and nationalized health care should also be something a wealthy provides for it's citizens (though I don't believe in the idea that it's owed to non-citizen and non-taxpaying residents).

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, pilight said:

Capitalism certainly isn't perfect, but it's a fair sight better than anything else we've tried.  Communism isn't even in the same ballpark.

But there are socio-political and economic systems that have been proposed by academics and experts that have never been tried - and SOMEHOW, they tend not to not get any promotion. Wealthy corporate media tycoons won't give space for such promotion on their networks and platforms, universities cut funding to such academics, or give them more tedious tasks to occupy them, if the create or promote such ideas, and lobby groups say there's no money in it. Funny how that works, isn't it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Patine Regarding the "good fight" I remembered Dominic Grieve's independent campaign to the House of Commons after he was sacked by the Tories due to not share their Brexit stance. If I were a resident of Beaconsfield constituency I probably had backed Grieve's reelection campaign despite disagreeing with him on Brexit as well. At least he had demonstrated enormous integrity by standing up for his own believes while facing huge disadvantages on a personal level. That's what I consider a good fight. It's clear that Confederate leaders were traitors on the one hand, but I still think it's legitimate to not favor renaming military bases from which the US had won tremendous victories overseas. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Conservative Elector 2 said:

@Patine Regarding the "good fight" I remembered Dominic Grieve's independent campaign to the House of Commons after he was sacked by the Tories due to not share their Brexit stance. If I were a resident of Beaconsfield constituency I probably had backed Grieve's reelection campaign despite disagreeing with him on Brexit as well. At least he had demonstrated enormous integrity by standing up for his own believes while facing huge disadvantages on a personal level. That's what I consider a good fight. It's clear that Confederate leaders were traitors on the one hand, but I still think it's legitimate to not favor renaming military bases from which the US had won tremendous victories overseas. 

I don't see a candidate in an election (not a civil war or insurgency, but an election) who broke with their party on a matter of principal and has forced to become an Independent by typical Parliamentary party conventions (something that happens ALL THE TIME in Parliamentary systems, including Canada) is AT ALL, even remotely, comparable to the leaders of the Confederacy and the reasons they rebelled and were willing and able to fight the most nasty, bloody, and casualty-heavy war on American soil and kill and shed the blood liberally of their former fellow citizens - in some case blood family - to preserve - potentially indefinitely - a perceived "right" to maintain the barbaric and racist economic institution of Black chattel slavery.

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Patine said:

I don't see a candidate in an election (not a civil war or insurgency, but an election) who broke with their party on a matter of principal and has forced to become an Independent by typical Parliamentary party conventions (something that happens ALL THE TIME in Parliamentary systems, including Canada) is AT ALL, even remotely, comparable to the leaders of the Confederacy and the reasons they rebelled and were willing and able to fight the most nasty, bloody, and casualty-heavy war on American soil and kill and shed the blood liberally of their former fellow citizens - in some case blood family - to preserve - potentially indefinitely - a perceived "right" to maintain the barbaric and racist economic institution of Black chattel slavery.

??? I mentioned Grieve because you mentioned a good fight, so I tried to elaborate what a good fight means to me by giving an anecdote. I did not compare him to the Confederates.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Conservative Elector 2 said:

??? I mentioned Grieve because you mentioned a good fight, so I tried to elaborate what a good fight means to me by giving an anecdote. I did not compare him to the Confederates.

In those particular cases, "the good fight," is VERY subjective in terms of being, "good." Standing up for one's convictions, even at personal sacrifice, is not objectively "the good fight," though may be subjectively so some, or even to many. Does that make sense?

Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Patine said:

In those particular cases, "the good fight," is VERY subjective in terms of being, "good." Standing up for one's convictions, even at personal sacrifice, is not objectively "the good fight," though may be subjectively so some, or even to many. Does that make sense?

It does. As I stated "what a good fight means to me", so yes it's subjectively ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/9/2020 at 7:02 PM, vcczar said:

Let me elaborate on this by stating that I have a strong dislike of Communism, but I have a strong like of Socialism, at least in the Scandinavian forms of Socialism and in the quasi-Socialistic governments of Western and Central Europe, and possibly in Canada (I know less about Canada than I do about Europe). My opinion on Capitalism is more favorable than not, but I am more critical of capitalism than I am about Socialism---mainly because I favor systems that aim for the many rather than for the few. I think that capitalism and socialism are mutually beneficial to one another to cover their respective weaknesses. I also think that we are yet to find a better system than these two so far; however, I think it is possible that something greater will emerge in the future, be it 50, 100, or 250 years from now. 

 

On 7/9/2020 at 7:17 PM, Patine said:

Although certainly not a Communist, myself, and realizing the failure of such a system, I must point out the damage, ruin, corruption, and lack of integrity and death toll by completely unnecessary and avoidable causes that unregulated (or poorly regulated, or plutocratic-by-graft-and-bribery) Corporatism has also wrought on much of the world. I would even be so bold as to say it's completely and utterly failed as a system as thoroughly as Communism - it's just that the tiny percentage TRULY benefiting refuse to allow it fall, or be replaced, or viewed commonly as even having any viable or workable alternatives, and the hugely disproportionate resources they have allow them to keep their Regime of Mammon going in it's highly dysfunctional form. Regulation - a lot of more of it than many are led to believe is needed or should be allowed - needs to be levied on all aspects of business - labour, consumer protection, anti-trust, integrity, advertising standards, taxation, and others - especially punishing corruption and graft - to make things actual work. And it's government that needs to get a backbone and do this - because, despite the myth and urban legend, market competition will not, and has proven not to, do so itself - it also makes things worse. Also, a social safety is NECESSARY for a society, especially a wealthy one, and nationalized health care should also be something a wealthy provides for it's citizens (though I don't believe in the idea that it's owed to non-citizen and non-taxpaying residents).

Wouldn't call either of you socialist in the true sense of the word, both of you seem like proponents of a much heavier regulated free market.  Would have to ask other questions, ie. beliefs on private land ownership, religious institutions, complete abolishment of all private business, etc.  I wouldn't even describe the frequently cited Scandinavian countries as socialist; in my opinion, welfare programs != socialist.  True socialism involves the complete abolishment of the private sector, no private ownership of land, banning of religion, etc. Why it bothers me a bit to hear so many young people claim to ascribe to the ideology, or its worse big brother, communism.

Agreed on the point that unrestricted socialism and capitalism end up in the same result, an elite ruling class with everyone else excluded.  No system is truly perfect, there will be flaws with whatever design mankind comes up with.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...