Politics Thread: Edge of Seventeen

[Malcador]

The Federal Government should cut off Tennessee, as they worship traitors

Edited April 18, 2018 by Malcador

[ShadySands]

The old enemies are the new heroes

[Gfted1]

Expand the scope of your vision guys. The city pulls a scumbag move to circumvent laws that were specifically written to protect monuments by selling these public spaces to a non-profit organization who then, in the dark of night, remove these monuments. This could happen for . Think about that perspective instead of "durr, burn the Confederate history to the ground"*.

 

*not you guys.

[Malcador]

Expand the scope of your vision guys. The city pulls a scumbag move to circumvent laws that were specifically written to protect monuments by selling these public spaces to a non-profit organization who then, in the dark of night, remove these monuments. This could happen for <whatever the crusade du jour is>. Think about that perspective instead of "durr, burn the Confederate history to the ground"*.

 

*not you guys.

How's it a scumbag move though , especially given the context of the law itself - is from 2013 or so and has a pretty clear intent even if they throw in every armed conflict (seriously, it protects monuments to the Grenada invasion oh, sorry, no need to malign the courageous veterans of that savage conflict) Not even sure how you can forbid the violating of the "spirit of the law" and approaching enforcement of laws that way is worrying as well.

Edited April 18, 2018 by Malcador

[Gromnir]

...

 

gifted is no doubt also shocked people would consider oskar schindler's actions to be heroic. scumbag repeated circumvented laws which were specific written to protect the heritage o' his nation.  

 

nathan bedford forrest were the first grand wizard o' the kkk and his only other noteworthy accomplishment were his military prowess in a war to defend slavery. tennessee legislature is the reason we do not visit the south unless necessary.

[Gfted1]

*Gfted is neither shocked, nor surprised, that Gromnir didn't understand the meaning of the post at all*

[Gfted1]

How's it a scumbag move though , especially given the context of the law itself - is from 2013 or so and has a pretty clear intent even if they throw in every armed conflict (seriously, it protects monuments to the Grenada invasion oh, sorry, no need to malign the courageous veterans of that savage conflict) Not even sure how you can forbid the violating of the "spirit of the law" and approaching enforcement of laws that way is worrying as well.

Imo, the rule of law should trump the rule of emotion, every time.

 

Don't like the law? Change it instead of scumbag it.

[Gromnir]

*Gfted is neither shocked, nor surprised, that Gromnir didn't understand the meaning of the post at all*

am neither shocked nor surprised by gifted's reaction... which is kinda why we needed make the post.

 

memphis takes legal action to circumvent what they see as a wrong.  scumbags indeed.

[Malcador]

So, legally working around a law is violating the rule of law ?

[ShadySands]

Skipping the letter of the law vs the spirit of the law, it's hard to feel sympathy for the leaders of the KKK and CSA so let's say it was a statue of Harriet Tubman and MLK. Would I care if someone removed those statues from private property? A little maybe, not enough to really care what people do with their land as long as they aren't hurting anyone. I'd surely never visit whatever place that did it and would likely think very poorly of the people that did it unless they had a really good reason for it.

[Gfted1]

@Gromnir: I just don't have the energy to get pulled into the cesspool that is conversating with you. My bad.

 

@Malcador: You know what I mean, its written in my first post on the matter. Is the rest of our conversation on this matter going to be pissing about my follow up comment? The point is, as clearly spelled out in the link, that the city did an end around of a law just to satisfy the screaming of the day. Who paid for those statues, the taxpayers?

[Malcador]

@Gromnir: I just don't have the energy to get pulled into the cesspool that is conversating with you. My bad.

 

@Malcador: You know what I mean, its written in my first post on the matter. Is the rest of our conversation on this matter going to be pissing about my follow up comment? The point is, as clearly spelled out in the link, that the city did an end around of a law just to satisfy the screaming of the day. Who paid for those statues, the taxpayers?

Okay, well usually touting the rule of law isn't the spirit of it as that is pretty damn nebuluous. Did the people of Memphis say they wanted it gone from their city ? While it may be screaming of the day or whatever, it is the people's wish in that case. At worst it seems a scumbag move got a scumbag move, so all even.

[Guard Dog]

 

Democrat Bo Mitchell warned of "bad consequences," not just in Memphis or Tennessee, but nationwide. "Because what you're doing here today is the bad actions of someone who brought arms against their nation and fought against our country, committed treason, then was a proven war criminal, and was slave trader," he said, referring to Forrest. "You're going to choose to honor that person here on this floor today and hold it against a city."

Impressive. Every word of that sentence was wrong.

 

Anyway, I have spent many, many years studying the US Civil war. I figure I know more about it than most folks do, I think this whole statue business is a whole lot of night soil from a large male bovine. They were put up some sixty years after the war. No one who actually fought it was around to see this. And they have gone on to serve the whole "it wasn't about slavery" narrative that is as pernicious as it is wrong. It's also give a platform to call the Confederates traitors and whatnot which is also wrong because of a failure to understand the United States of 1861 bore little resemblance to the United States we live in today. The Confederacy is dead. It serves no purpose for people who have no understanding of it to pull it out of the ground and make it dance or lynch it (depending). Let it go.

 

But anyway. This little kerfuffle is rooted in the same hubris as a lot of other heavy handed government BS these days: Ownership. Did those parks belong to the City of Memphis or not. If so they can sell them to whomever they choose and the only people they are answerable to is the citizens of Memphis. But on the other hand I pay taxes in Tennessee. Why does Memphis need $250k of the money me and my fellow Tennesseans worked for to have a f-----g party I wasn't even invited to? But whatever. My opinions of the gang in Nashville are hardened and not repeatable in mixed company.

 

Although I wish I had known the parks were for sale. I'd have bought them, bull dozed them and sold them. And if any one complained I'd have shown them my Warantee Deed and said "this is my property and I can do whatever the hell I like with it!" Just like they should say to Nashville.

[smjjames]

@Gromnir: I just don't have the energy to get pulled into the cesspool that is conversating with you. My bad.

 

Ouch....

[Gromnir]

@Gromnir: I just don't have the energy to get pulled into the cesspool that is conversating with you. My bad.

 

 

good idea.  recent past doesn't bode well for you.

 

even the thread creator were confused by gifted's tangled and twisted reading.

 

regardless, am thinking folks would be shocked if oldie pamphlets and texts supporting eugenics and the inherent mental instability o' women, which were sadly common educational materials in some places as recent as 50 years ago, were nevertheless taught in schools today.  as a people, we grow... we learn.  would never occur to us that a book revered in schools during a darker time would need be a continued part o' curriculum today.  destroy books is constitutional, but is considered repugnant by most americans.  as such we take those curiously misguided books and put 'em back on the shelf, but am doubting even gifted would suggest those largely rejected works need be public venerated with a place o' honor.  

 

tennessee legislature wants to force into perpetuity a place o' honor for folks such as the first grand wizard o' the kkk?  shame on them.  if memphis found a perfectly legal way to circumvent such a stoopid law, then we applaud 'em as 'posed to vilifying. the folks in the wrong here, though they is clear too myopic to realize, is gifted and the tennessee legislature. no surprise on either account.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited April 18, 2018 by Gromnir

[Guard Dog]

We have several. This one is the best: https://www.nps.gov/shil/index.htm

[Bartimaeus]

 

@Gromnir: I just don't have the energy to get pulled into the cesspool that is conversating with you. My bad.

 

Ouch....

 

The irony!

[smjjames]

We have several. This one is the best: https://www.nps.gov/shil/index.htm

 

Battle site memorials are fine with me, and Tennessee was host to some of the bloodiest.

[Gromnir]

 

We have several. This one is the best: https://www.nps.gov/shil/index.htm

 

Battle site memorials are fine with me, and Tennessee was host to some of the bloodiest.

 

lord knows Gromnir has specific expressed our support for such.  memorials o' the enormous and tragic waste o' human life on both sides o' the war, not to mention the suffering o' countless civilians (mostly southern) who died died from starvation and disease, serve a valuable purpose and only the most extreme sjw oppose those memorials.  however, am thinking we can all tell the difference 'tween such and big bronze statutes o' nathan bedford forrest on his horse which were erected during the civil rights movement o' the 20th century.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[ShadySands]

^Gromnir beat me to it

Edited April 18, 2018 by ShadySands

[Guard Dog]

Whenever I hear people talk about preserving history and then say something off the wall wrong I cringe. Read a book first. Nathan Bedford Forest was not evil, he was not a traitor, and he was not a hero. He was a very gifted military strategist and cavalryman. He was also soft spoken, self-educated, insecure, and more than a little fearful. That drove him to do big things on the battlefield and make big mistakes in his business dealings. He was one of the founders the Klan and later renounced them and publicly criticized them. He was a man living in his time, just like all the rest of them. Pulling him out of his grave now and castigating or lionizing him isn't just promoting one version of history or another, it's promoting ignorance. Don't apply modern mores to people from the past. You are not doing them or yourself any credit. Learn about the time they lived in, not just about them.

[smjjames]

And 'the time he lived in' is often the context that such statues are placed in, plus the fact that a great many of them were erected many decades, almost a hundred years in some cases, after the Civil War ended.

 

Statues of confederate soldiers are always going to be controversial, especially when white supremacists keep latching onto them and ignoring the real historical context.

[Gromnir]

am finding it equal cringeworthy when folks excuse scurrilous behaviour and outright villany as a symptom o' the times.  if gd were arguing 'bout some o' the less educated founding fathers during the american revolution and their views o' race, we would be willing to accept such an argument. by the time o' the civil war, there were no such excuses.  also, the Battle of Fort Pillow (more recognizable as the massacre of fort pillow) will be known to gd and if he wanna turn a blind eye to such then we will never be able to convince him otherwise.

 

oh, and nbf not only public criticized the kkk in later life when such membership were hurting his railroad aspirations, but he frequent lied claiming he had never been a part o' the kkk.  hardly the admirable and repentant figure gd implies, eh?

 

nbf may not be the worst example gd could use for defense, but is not a good one.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Guard Dog]

And 'the time he lived in' is often the context that such statues are placed in, plus the fact that a great many of them were erected many decades, almost a hundred years in some cases, after the Civil War ended.

 

Statues of confederate soldiers are always going to be controversial, especially when white supremacists keep latching onto them and ignoring the real historical context.

Exactly. That is the problem. When you look at Forest's place in history I would not have picked him for a statue. I can name four, maybe five Confederate figures that were worthy of being memorialized. I unless you've been reading Shelby Foote's work there a good chance you've never heard of most of them.

[HoonDing]

There's a statue of Cromwell in Westminster.