What are your thoughts on the Confederate memorials being taken down in NOLA?
- Thread starter Displaced Bama Fan
- Start date
Amazon Avenue? Why would Atlanta name a street after a self-mutilating group of violent misanthropes?
Shouldn't there have been some kind ofhttps://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...trials&usg=AFQjCNEfFszxGz7igZ7nb9GwtqYxrejtpQ Nuremberg Truth and Reconcilation hearings after the Civil War
Last edited:
It never occurred to me that Arlington Cemetery is an appropriate memorial to Lee, but booman's argument makes sense to me.
And so him being monumental in reconstruction and trying to bridge the gap after the war is meaningless?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
meaningless? no. deserving of public honor and adulation by the country against which he committed treason in defense of slavery? no
I agree with 92, what you mention is not meaningless. But I will respond with another question...when Lee, after the war, said it would not be appropriate to build statues in his honor, were his thoughts meaningless?
Only if Lincoln would have been the first to be investigated.
The more I read about Lee the more I'm convinced that he was one of our greatest Americans.
If someone has already posted this apologies ahead of time. I'm sure a lot of people here aren't podcast fans but I strongly recommended a recent episode of 99% Invisible (click here). It's actually an older episode of a different podcast that 99% aired. Just a different way to approach the topic and convey an opinion.
There are so many assumptions built into that opinion.
For example, if the sovereign people of a state decide that their state is no longer in the Union, is it treasonous to obey them? And clearly the same body that decided that Virginia was in the Union (i.e. the conventions of the people of Virginia of 1788) had decided (in 1861), after President Lincoln's unconstitutional call for troops to invade and overthrow elected state governments of South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi Louisiana and Texas and replace them with appointed military governments, that obeying the orders of the president was itself unconstitutional, and thus they decided they could no longer safely remain in the Union. Lee was no supporter of secession, but once the sovereign people of Virginia had decided the issue of whether Virginia was in the Union or not, their will governed his.
Booman might not be aware, but the Founders themselves clearly believed that membership in the Union was up to the people of each state to decide.
Interesting that the Lee family sued the federal government for the return of Arlington and won in 1882. Rather than move back in and saddle the federal government with the expense of disinterring thousands of Union soldiers, they decided to sell the property to the federal government for $150,000.
And if president Lincoln had simply obeyed the people of the United States and the constitutional limitations they placed on the powers of the federal government, there would have been no dead to be buried at Arlington, because there would have been no war for them to have lost their lives in.
Booman seems to be long on polemic and short on history.
You left out what I consider to be a very important point...with no war to preserve the United States, we wouldn't have the magnificent country that we now have.
you should write the guy, i'm pretty sure he has a link on his page where you can contact him. he seems to appreciate lost cause arguments.
That does not necessarily follow. It is entirely possible that, given peaceful secession, that northerners who were not bloodthirsty extremist would have shut down the radical, violence-minded John Brown types (because, if the southern states had seceded peacefully, northerners would no longer have been responsible in any way for slavery or returning fugitive slaves since southern states would have been foreign countries), worked out some compromise that would have enticed southern states back into a more moderate Union.
Of course, we'll never know, because president Lincoln decided to send a military expedition into a tense situation in the hope that a war would break out. Peaceful secession would have been absolutely ruinous of northern business interests which were overwhelmingly pro-Republican in 1860, so Lincoln the Republican decided that a war (with 620,000 dead) was better than peace.
Or, in the failure of northern moderates to rein in bloodthirsty northern radicals of the John Brown stripe, maybe separate countries would be for the best. It has worked out fine for Norway-Sweden, Slovakia-the Czech Republic, Lithuania-Latvia-Estonia and the Soviet Union.
Latest threads
-
A huge win today at my doctor's office...- Started by uafan4life
- Replies: 4
-
-
Question: Chris Youngblood did he commit over the weekend?
- Started by mlingerfelt31
- Replies: 5
-
-
-
