I totally agree. Life isn't just black and white. However for some people they ain't trying to hear how good Hitler's autobahns were, if that makes sense. I didn't know Forrest disowned the Klan later on. Rarely any mention of that in any current discourse about him; I think Lee is the only one who escapes with some credit.
Mass shooting at Church in US
- Thread starter pauldyson1uk
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
I totally agree. Life isn't just black and white. However for some people they ain't trying to hear how good Hitler's autobahns were, if that makes sense. I didn't know Forrest disowned the Klan later on. Rarely any mention of that in any current discourse about him; I think Lee is the only one who escapes with some credit.
Forrest dissolved the Klan in 1869 after he found that the "aims and methods had been perverted." Lots of chapters no doubt ignored him. Supposedly, the Klan was started as a counter to carpetbaggers and Northern influence or exploitation in the South but soon became violent. That's when he tried to dissolve it. He then made a speech in Memphis about reconciliation. There's also the Fort Pillow Massacre, which suffers from the fog of war and bias of reporting--making what actually happened unclear. That's not to say he was a good man, but Robert Byrd was a Klan (modern Klan, not the fledgling Klan of the 1860s so their purpose and methods were clear) member before he was a Congressman and then worked staunchly for Democrats for decades.
http://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn83045160/1875-07-06/ed-1/seq-1/
I agree that people aren't really interested in what good they did, but many of the soldiers/generals weren't like the leaders of the Confederacy (Jefferson Davis, Stephens, etc.) who were the driving force behind the Confederacy. I hold more disdain for them and the ruling class of the Confederacy than the guys who fought. The average soldiers were fighting to preserve the status quo of a ridiculously stratified region because they thought it was in their interest. It's almost like the people who vote GOP despite being working class white people who oppose tax changes that would benefit them.
Forrest dissolved the Klan in 1869 after he found that the "aims and methods had been perverted." Lots of chapters no doubt ignored him. Supposedly, the Klan was started as a counter to carpetbaggers and Northern influence or exploitation in the South but soon became violent. That's when he tried to dissolve it. He then made a speech in Memphis about reconciliation. There's also the Fort Pillow Massacre, which suffers from the fog of war and bias of reporting--making what actually happened unclear. That's not to say he was a good man, but Robert Byrd was a Klan (modern Klan, not the fledgling Klan of the 1860s so their purpose and methods were clear) member before he was a Congressman and then worked staunchly for Democrats for decades.
http://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn83045160/1875-07-06/ed-1/seq-1/
I agree that people aren't really interested in what good they did, but many of the soldiers/generals weren't like the leaders of the Confederacy (Jefferson Davis, Stephens, etc.) who were the driving force behind the Confederacy. I hold more disdain for them and the ruling class of the Confederacy than the guys who fought. The average soldiers were fighting to preserve the status quo of a ridiculously stratified region because they thought it was in their interest. It's almost like the people who vote GOP despite being working class white people who oppose tax changes that would benefit them.
Great posts (you and Adexkola). As far north as Maryland I was taught explicitly that the civil war had exactly nothing to do with slavery, and was then handed a set of poorly defined causes along the lines of states rights, differences in economies, industrial vs. agricultural, etc. Along with your valid point about explicit lost cause revisionism there was also that reflexive nod towards moral equivalence in the acknowledgment of a common racism. "People in the north could be racist as well, so the war wasn't about that." It can seem compelling enough, but there's a lot of detail hidden in there, and as usual it's the details where things get interesting and relevant. As I've gotten older and read a good deal about it (there's a gold mine of good lit on the subject) and am more convinced than ever it was about slavery and little else. I recall in his cornerstone speech, CSA VP Alexander Stephens couldn't have made it any more clear.
Pretty much all the other related causes cited, trace right back to the existence of slavery: Free Soil and Free Labor movements, States rights (Davis said the South wanted states rights explicitly so they could protect their right to slavery), balance of power in congress (Kansas/Missouri border wars). The northern belief in Union as sacrosanct with secession as treason would be the one that doesn't relate.
I spent half my life growing up in the South (Texas and Mississippi) and I still love the place, and it's a shame how willfully misunderstood it is. Having most recently just moved from the Pacific NW, I can attest to that, with so many content to consider them all as cross burning bubbas.
Interesting microcosm of history relating to the portrayal of reconstruction are the 2 Confederate generals Longstreet and Jubal Early. Longstreet (Lee's long serving right hand) soon after the war acknowledged that the cause of the CSA was wrong and encouraged reconciliation and worked to further reconstruction. This got him quickly vilified by Jubal Early who, as the leader and primary author of the "Lost Cause" revisionism, saw fit to degrade Longstreet's contributions and quickly rewrote history to blame him for so many of the Southern defeats. This along with other detailed tragedies of the derailment of reconstruction are documented in an infuriating book called "The Bloody Shirt". Some of the best reading though are from the former slave narratives, which are remarkably nuanced and almost surprisingly varied. You can hear it all from the hope before emancipation, to the elation and outright confusion afterward, and then the onset of terror afterwards particularly for those who stayed.
In general, I think the uproar over the flag is misdirected, with it providing a shallow pool for all sorts to come wading in to wag their fingers and stroke their indignation. I do like the irony that an underwhelming, messed up dork brave enough to wiggle his trigger finger has managed to get the flag he was so proud of finally taken down. I can see that there's a value to getting some value out of this whole tragedy. There is merit to the idea that it represents other things such as Southern pride that isn't necessarily racist, and that the flag has come to represent the general spirit of rebellion (the bikers I knew in Russia weren't wearing it to herald their racism). What it represents from history shouldn't have to be borne by the rest of us though. Should have been taken down years ago (around 1865 I reckon).
More surprising though is that there's been some surprisingly detailed conversations around the nature of the flag and so the civil war like you guys were doing. Very refreshing.
Woman who said rebel flag isn't racist has ties to KKK
BRANSON, Mo. -- The Confederate flag represents Southern culture, Anna Robb said.
In an interview with the News-Leader on Monday, she said the flag represents faith, family and freedom — not slavery, racism or white supremacy.
On Thursday, the News-Leader was alerted by readers that Robb's husband Nathan, co-owner of the store, once tried to adopt a highway in Arkansas on behalf of the Ku Klux Klan, and that Nathan Robb's father is Thomas Robb, the national director of the KKK....
http://www.11alive.com/story/news/n...said-rebel-flag-not-racism-ties-kkk/29453871/
BRANSON, Mo. -- The Confederate flag represents Southern culture, Anna Robb said.
In an interview with the News-Leader on Monday, she said the flag represents faith, family and freedom — not slavery, racism or white supremacy.
On Thursday, the News-Leader was alerted by readers that Robb's husband Nathan, co-owner of the store, once tried to adopt a highway in Arkansas on behalf of the Ku Klux Klan, and that Nathan Robb's father is Thomas Robb, the national director of the KKK....
http://www.11alive.com/story/news/n...said-rebel-flag-not-racism-ties-kkk/29453871/
Pretty powerful images from South Carolina today - a black cop helping an old white supremacist with a swastika on his t-shirt up after he suffered from heat exhaustion.
I'd caption that as taking out the trash.
I see lots of those white supremacist trash wearing swastikas.
Is swastika banned in the US?
Is swastika banned in the US?
No I don't think it is(Not banned in the UK either).
Really?
So you can wear it around happily with no danger of being arrested?
1st amendment protects all of that in the US I think. In the UK the Royal Family love all the Nazi business so we have to have to put up with it.
Yep pretty much. The swastika was sorta big in the Punk days(Mainly as a tool to shock people).
Dont get it.
Here its a bit loose, as I get it swastika and similar symbols (ustashi regime and such) are regarded as hate and discriminatory symbols and you can get arrested wearing it, but the law isnt so precise about it. I'm not sure if even the term swastika is mentioned.
Here its a bit loose, as I get it swastika and similar symbols (ustashi regime and such) are regarded as hate and discriminatory symbols and you can get arrested wearing it, but the law isnt so precise about it. I'm not sure if even the term swastika is mentioned.
I was walking down a street in Singapore last week and saw this:
As a westerner I was fairly stunned by it but apparently it's a big deal still with Buddist and Hindu communities. The symbol is an omen for success and prosperity for them.
As a westerner I was fairly stunned by it but apparently it's a big deal still with Buddist and Hindu communities. The symbol is an omen for success and prosperity for them.
In India, it's very common to see. It's in the opposite direction to the Nazi symbol, and the Nazis ripped it off.I was walking down a street in Singapore last week and saw this:
As a westerner I was fairly stunned by it but apparently it's a big deal still with Buddist and Hindu communities. The symbol is an omen for success and prosperity for them.
See also: the homosexual community using rainbows.
I never realised the Nazi version was inverted. Sorry I don't understand the homosexual / rainbows relevance? Is the rainbow also used as a symbol in Buddism and Hinduism?
Many years ago I remember going to my Hindu mate's home and seeing a religious shrine centring around a large blinged up swastika. Needless to say the ignorant me was equal bits confused and horrified.
It wasn't a serious comment. I meant in the sense the rainbow is now widely associated with the LGBT cause/community as opposed to just being a rainbow.
Like the Hindu Swastika was a symbol for prosperity etc, now it is invariably always thought of as a Nazi symbol first and then a Hindu symbol second.
I get you. It's strange that so much stigma is attached to the swastika when it was used so extensively by others before the Nazis got their hands on it. We don't have such aversion to their other symbols like the eagle or the lightning bolts.
The guy who followed the Klan around with a sousaphone is fecking hero.
It's a good mycrocosm of why enshrined free expression is great. The very same thing that allows hateful idiots to air their nonsense grievances, allows people to follow them around with a silly instrument.
Last edited:
I expect this might lead to something. Imagine some kazoos and a slide whistle in the mix.What a champ.
Got the idea from England's matches.
All anti-facist movements would be much better served with a sousaphone and a slide whistle. Shouting and leaflets don't faze fascists. It's their bread and butter. Silly instruments and satire however, are well beyond their remit.
Dylann Roof is sentenced to death.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...sentenced-to-death-charleston-church-shooting
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...sentenced-to-death-charleston-church-shooting
Good riddance.
It's probably doing him a favour. Can you imagine what would happen to him in general population in prison.
He'd become the head neo-nazi?
Sign this man up to play the Russian anthem during Trump's inauguration speech.
Yeah, he'd be an Aryan brotherhood hero.
A guy like him was only ever getting the death sentence. Should have shot himself at the time and saved everyone the hassle.
He'd never make it a month in general population. It's a death sentence either way
He deserves a medal
They'd never let a guy like that near other prisoners death sentence or not.
Aren't there special kinds of prison arrangements for people like him? As a matter of principle, I'm against the death penalty.
I just cannot find any fault in this decision
I see no point in keeping him alive.
I see no point in keeping him alive.