some did, some didn't -but it worked itself out with time.
Now the south is a model of tolerance, unlike the progressive Pacific NW and cities like NY and Minneapolis
End of the line for noted traitor Robert E Lee
- Thread starter Cypress
- Start date
Now the south is a model of tolerance, unlike the progressive Pacific NW and cities like NY and Minneapolis
It didn't work itself out, it took the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act 100 years after the Civil War...and Conservatives opposed (and continue to oppose) both.
LMAO! You don't live in the South...I do. It is not a model of tolerance. Not by a longshot.
that cemented changes that reactionaries/racists like George Wallace were still clinging to elsewise.
I grew up in Maryland (border state) live breifly in Wilmington NC briefly ( deep south) and now Florida for 20 years
I have vastly more life experience then you ( the only advantage to getting old) so I know of what I speak
So they didn't move on, did they? It took an act of Congress to do it, resisted by most of the people in the South and the Conservative Movement.
That history is also not on the plaques of the participation trophies you say are history.
What good is that experience if it's all shit?
So you've never lived outside of the old Confederacy, so you have absolutely no frame of reference for tolerance. You never lived outside it so you don't know what you're talking about when you say the South is tolerant. So your "experience" is very limited.
It would be like applying for a job but only having one previous employer for 20 years on your resume. Like...OK you have 20 years experience working the same job for the same company, so how are you qualified for this new job?
yet you have it all wrong due to your personal perspective. The Jim Crow laws existed for 100 years and were deliberate ways to suppress and hold down blacks. They were shameful and immoral. The Dixie Crats made all sorts of laws to hold back minorities and stop them from voting. Remember the Little Rock school opening? How about the lunch counter sit-ins? What about freedom riders? How about Lester Maddox and the axe handle?
Hey look, a Russian troll like anatta isn't going to know the finer details of civil rights history in the US. That's how you can tell he's a Russian troll...the details he does give are scripted, rehearsed, and light. He never makes more than a vague observation. Almost as if he's Googling stuff about the US in real time.
His address spoke to the cause the North was fighting for - freedom and preservation of the Union.
Read it again if you don't believe me or are unfamiliar with the address.
And what were the values the Confederate States of America were fighting for?
That's right ...Slavery >
https://www.justplainpolitics.com/s...ed-traitor-Robert-E-Lee&p=3717379#post3717379
"It is now taken for granted–Lincoln’s historic address It redefined the Civil War as a struggle not just for the Union, but also for the principle of human equality."
History.com
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.history.com/.amp/topics/american-civil-war/gettysburg-address
I asked three questions and your answer is "Buuuut, Mommmm, they made me do it!!!!"? Which frickin' high school did you graduate from?
On the side; all the RWNJs I give shit for being idiots should take note that I do the same to the LWLs.
saying the south is a model of tolerance is pretty much the dumbest thing ever said on the planet
Like I said before, most weren't slave owners. Most of the war was fought in the South, many fought for their land. Slavery was a big part of it, but not the whole reason.
When you open fire on American soldiers (Fort Sumter) , declare yourself an independent nation, and raise an insurrectionist militia, you are just going to have to expect a military response from the United States.
The State of Mississippi's official Declaration of Seccesion clearly says the primary issue they were fighting for was the right to enslave millions of humans.
Getting back to your original claim - you said the Gettysburg Battlefield should not be associated with a broader educational purpose about the values and moral principles underlying the battle.
One of our greatest presidents -Abraham Lincoln - disagreed with you. He made crystal clear in his Gettysburg address that the true meaning of Gettysburg was all about the principles and values the North was fighting for - freedom and preservation of our great Union
Alexander Stephens speech given in Galveston, Texas, clearly states that the reason for the Confederacy was to preserve slavery.
Whitewashing the primary underlying reasons for the Civil War is part and parcel of the Lost Cause mythology.
In defense of the South, I have my doubts if most residents of the south ever actively even supported the insurrection.
Black residents of the south obviously did not support the establishment of a nation whose constitution explicitly enshrined chattel slavery in perpetuity and for all time. And blacks were a majority in some deep south states.
I even have doubts that all poor white tenant farmers who did not own slaves were keen to die to protect the right of the plantation aristocracy to keep slaves
I maintain the case can be made that the insurrection was funded and supported by the wealthy plantation aristocracy. It was not a populist movement supported by the majority of residents of the south
I asked three questions and your answer is "Buuuut, Mommmm, they made me do it!!!!"? Which frickin' high school did you graduate from?
On the side; all the RWNJs I give shit for being idiots should take note that I do the same to the LWLs.
So you admit that the South fired the first shot. So what is the point of your questions?
LOL. Dude, you're still dodging the questions. Until you do, I'll have no respect for your replies about this subject.
Why are you trying to erase history?