Jump to content

Menu

Recommended Posts

This statement shows a real lack of understanding of the people of the time period. More than 75% of Southerners were so poor at the time of the Civli War that survival was the main issue. Do you now how many years that Congress fought to resolve the issue of slavery without a war? The fact is, giving up slavery would destroy the economy of the South. If your family was at stake, perhas your "holier than thou" attitude wouldn't have made muh sese?

 

Are you seriously trying to make a case that people should be sympathetic to poor white slave owners? Even if my family were starving, I wouldn't enslave others to put food in their mouths. :001_huh:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 651
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Born and raised here. My MA is in economics, and quite a bit of my undergraduate and graduate work was on comparative economic systems, which included work on the slavery in the Confederacy and why it was not sustainable as a economic model.

Of course it wasn't sustainable; no one would argue that. It was a deplorable system built on the backs of slaves. What is your point? Cmmunism is also no a particularly sustainable econic system, but do you blame the average Joseph living in Soviet Russia for the ills of their government/economic system? Many southern men fought in the war because they truly believed they were doing the best thing for their families.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Who said anything about it being courageous? I certainly didn't. I am trying to deal in fact, not emotionalism which has been so prevalent on his thread. The fact of the matter is that souterners were ignornant to other ways of lie at the time. While it certainly wasn't courageous, it is understandable why they would fight in the war. Many believe things that were patently false because they couldn't read or write. I've been saying all along that we need to viw history through he eyes of the people who lived it-not our hindsight views. And, fwiw, the correct use of the verb phrase in your 7th sentence is "have gone", not "have went". Sorry, a petpeeve of mine.

 

How can you accuse others of emotionalism when you have been doing the same?

 

What exactly do people believe that cannot be true because many were illiterate?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Who said anything about it being courageous? I certainly didn't. I am trying to deal in fact, not emotionalism which has been so prevalent on his thread. The fact of the matter is that souterners were ignornant to other ways of lie at the time. While it certainly wasn't courageous, it is understandable why they would fight in the war. Many believe things that were patently false because they couldn't read or write. I've been saying all along that we need to viw history through he eyes of the people who lived it-not our hindsight views. And, fwiw, the correct use of the verb phrase in your 7th sentence is "have gone", not "have went". Sorry, a petpeeve of mine.

 

Oohhhh. Grammar snark. Very mature. The correctly spelling of the word in your 3rd sentence is "southerners" not "souterners". The 4th sentence should be "ignorant" not "ignornant", and the 7th should be "view" not "viw".

 

Perhaps instead of looking for errors, you could actually read what I said. Someone defending the Confederate soldiers used the term "courageous", and I used it in a response.

 

I also said quite clearly above that "I understand" why southerners did what they did, but I cannot condone or defend ignorance.

Link to post
Share on other sites
If you want to play that game Leeann, spelling "courageous" without the first "o" is a pet peeve of mine. I'll grant you the typos on "anything" but misspelling is not cool. :glare:

 

And I think when your argument degenerates into a grammar lesson, that it's possibly the end of the thread.

I did't misspell it. My computer keyboard is sticking. I've had to edit almost everything I've written today.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Here's what I've been mulling over.

 

I personally don't like it (I live in the South right now but am from CA). Where I grew up, it was seen as at least ignorant - if not racist. I don't personally think it is either one, necesarrily, but I will admit that I have known people who are both who have that flag. I have also known quite a few people who are "under the table" racists who do not fly the flag, and people who really aren't racist have one framed in their homes (usually as part of family history).

 

Anyway - here is something to chew on. There was a lot more involved in the Civil War. And,,, there were also a lot more people (Confederate or not) who supported slavery. Many Christian denominations were absolutely pro-slavery and used the scriptures to support it. The Democratic Party was pro-slavery (for the most part)....

 

 

So - are we saying that anyone in those denominations or in the Democratic party is also racist? If you take the same standards applied to the Confederate flag (and I'm guilty of this as well) and apply them to the two other issues above, well - you'd have to do mental gymnastics to avoid having to come to the same conclusion about all of them.

 

The flag is obviously a strong symbol. Based off the fact that there are 50 pages of posts, I'd say it's quite a controversial one as well. I believe it has a lot of historical significance for many families - just as someone diplaying their great-grandfather's army hat, or a long-ago relative's picture. As for those without family history who decide to fly it - I've never really understood it. But then again, I'm not a Southerner.

You may not be a Southener, but you understand the issue far better than many.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Are you seriously trying to make a case that people should be sympathetic to poor white slave owners? Even if my family were starving, I wouldn't enslave others to put food in their mouths. :001_huh:

 

Well - sure. You were raised in the 20th century - not the 19th.

It is very hard to do, but in order to really understand history and the people involved, we have to put aside our own modern way of thinking.

 

I'd sure like to think I wouldn't have done it either, but considerring how many wonderful historical figures whom we all respect so well had slaves (for example, Washington and Jefferson)... well - it's hard to say. If you were raised in the south and had been told everywhere by everyone - even at church (which was the biggest authority in your life) - that it was the right way to live - you really can't say what you would do.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Are you seriously trying to make a case that people should be sympathetic to poor white slave owners? Even if my family were starving, I wouldn't enslave others to put food in their mouths. :001_huh:

You say that from a warm house wih plenty of food in the refrigerator. You actuall have no idea what you would have done for your kids in that situation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, the average southerner was very poor. But why? Examine the economic, political, and educational system of the south at the time. It certainly did not benefit the average southerner. Yet they marched off to war to defend a system that was oppressive to them. That is courageous? Not in my book.

....I understand why they did what they did, but it was neither courageous nor something that should be celebrated.

 

So because a man disagrees with you, because he fights for a cause that you, and I, may find antithetical he cannot be courageous? I am sorry but that makes absolutely no sense. During WWII the Kamikaze pilot demonstrated courage, the Bolshevik who attacked American forces in Murmansk demonstrated valor as did the VC sapper at Khe Sahn and the Southern soldier who charged massed artillery showed a courage that makes one marvel. To deny this….well it is to deny many elements of the human character.

One should respect courage wherever it is found.

Link to post
Share on other sites
How can you accuse others of emotionalism when you have been doing the same?

 

What exactly do people believe that cannot be true because many were illiterate?

 

That people fom the North wanted to take over their farms and destroy the South so that the Nort could completely control the economy of the United States, including foreign tradewit nations such as the United Kingdom and France.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well - sure. You were raised in the 20th century - not the 19th.

It is very hard to do, but in order to really understand history and the people involved, we have to put aside our own modern way of thinking.

 

I'd sure like to think I wouldn't have done it either, but considerring how many wonderful historical figures whom we all respect so well had slaves (for example, Washington and Jefferson)... well - it's hard to say. If you were raised in the south and had been told everywhere by everyone - even at church (which was the biggest authority in your life) - that it was the right way to live - you really can't say what you would do.

 

You say that from a warm house wih plenty of food in the refrigerator. You actuall have no idea what you would have done for your kids in that situation.

 

And many in those same situations chose otherwise. I don't think it can be debated that farming in the South was easier than in some of the Northern states, including some which were Abolitionist bastions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So - are we saying that anyone in those denominations or in the Democratic party is also racist? If you take the same standards applied to the Confederate flag (and I'm guilty of this as well) and apply them to the two other issues above, well - you'd have to do mental gymnastics to avoid having to come to the same conclusion about all of them.

 

The flag is obviously a strong symbol. Based off the fact that there are 50 pages of posts, I'd say it's quite a controversial one as well. I believe it has a lot of historical significance for many families - just as someone diplaying their great-grandfather's army hat, or a long-ago relative's picture. As for those without family history who decide to fly it - I've never really understood it. But then again, I'm not a Southerner.

 

Does the Democratic party still support slavery or discrimination? No.

Same for those Christian denominations (or so I hope).

 

The difference is that the Confederate flag wasn't just used during the Civil War, but was also prominently displayed as a symbol of hate during the segregation battles. As stated many times in this thread, it is no coincidence that it started being flown again over southern capitols in the 50s and 60s.

 

I will admit that I do not understand flying a flag to celebrate the deeds of an ancestor that you never met, particularly when they way you choose to do so happens to be the same way that others have represented their desire to limit the rights of other Americans.

Link to post
Share on other sites
And many in those same situations chose otherwise. I don't think it can be debated that farming in the South was easier than in some of the Northern states, including some which were Abolitionist bastions.

 

 

Absolutely, and like I said - I hope that I would have been one of them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
And many in those same situations chose otherwise. I don't think it can be debated that farming in the South was easier than in some of the Northern states, including some which were Abolitionist bastions.

The economy of the North was not based soley on agriculture as it was in outh atthe time. Many people lived and worked in cities in industrial jobs. In the South, there were few other job opportunities.

Link to post
Share on other sites
So because a man disagrees with you, because he fights for a cause that you, and I, may find antithetical he cannot be courageous? I am sorry but that makes absolutely no sense. During WWII the Kamikaze pilot demonstrated courage, the Bolshevik who attacked American forces in Murmansk demonstrated valor as did the VC sapper at Khe Sahn and the Southern soldier who charged massed artillery showed a courage that makes one marvel. To deny this….well it is to deny many elements of the human character.

 

One should respect courage wherever it is found.

 

Celebrating the courage of those that were fighting to oppress others? No thanks. I won't even bother to respect it. They did what they thought they should do, but that doesn't make it right, and it certainly isn't something I will glorify.

 

If I had a long lost relative that bravely fought for the Nazis, I wouldn't fly a Swatika in his memory.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Does the Democratic party still support slavery or discrimination? No.

Same for those Christian denominations (or so I hope).

 

The difference is that the Confederate flag wasn't just used during the Civil War, but was also prominently displayed as a symbol of hate during the segregation battles. As stated many times in this thread, it is no coincidence that it started being flown again over southern capitols in the 50s and 60s.

 

I will admit that I do not understand flying a flag to celebrate the deeds of an ancestor that you never met, particularly when they way you choose to do so happens to be the same way that others have represented their desire to limit the rights of other Americans.

 

You make a great point. So -really then, following the logic of my original post (not that you have to - just for me thinking out loud) we should drop the topic of the Civil War and slavery in the South and rather focus on the symbolism the flag carried during the Civil Rights movement. That makes a lot more sense to me.

 

I honestly had always heard it in relation to the War - so,,,, Ill have to think about this for a while.....

Link to post
Share on other sites
You make a great point. So -really then, following the logic of my original post (not that you have to - just for me thinking out loud) we should drop the topic of the Civil War and slavery in the South and rather focus on the symbolism the flag carried during the Civil Rights movement. That makes a lot more sense to me.

 

I honestly had always heard it in relation to the War - so,,,, Ill have to think about this for a while.....

:iagree:

Link to post
Share on other sites
You say that from a warm house wih plenty of food in the refrigerator. You actuall have no idea what you would have done for your kids in that situation.

 

 

At this point, I am really aware of the assumptions of whiteness in this thread, and finding that interesting. (Not this poster alone, just this is the post that made me think of it.) So many people had no such choices to make.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The economy of the North was not based soley on agriculture as it was in outh atthe time. Many people lived and worked in cities in industrial jobs. In the South, there were few other job opportunities.

 

You are making some vast leaps in logic regarding the economic struggles between the north and the south. There was no intention to "destroy" the south and take over the farms as you claim, although there certainly were tariff battles that southern plantation owners felt put them at a disadvantage.

The southern economy was more agrarian than the north, but the north was not to blame for the difference. Southern culture and leadership played a larger role in the difference than any other factor. Southern states had based their economies on an economic model that was not sustainable, but had painted themselves into a corner politically, financially, and culturally.

Link to post
Share on other sites
You make a great point. So -really then, following the logic of my original post (not that you have to - just for me thinking out loud) we should drop the topic of the Civil War and slavery in the South and rather focus on the symbolism the flag carried during the Civil Rights movement. That makes a lot more sense to me.

 

I honestly had always heard it in relation to the War - so,,,, Ill have to think about this for a while.....

 

I agree. Unfortunately, this kind of discussion always splits into those two distinct arguments. Those who defend the flag see it as a cultural symbol because they are able to do so. They have never been hurt by its use or been affected by the message that some choose to send by flying it. Those who have been understand quite clearly the message it sends now, and cannot look past that to see it as simply a "piece of history".

Link to post
Share on other sites

As for the bravery of the Southern soldiers -

There were actually many soldiers in the Confederate army who agreed with the North on the slavery issue - but decided to fight for their home state anyway. For a variety of reasons - but one of them was that even then, there was a lot less "US" pride and a lot more state pride.

 

The state you were raised in was very important to you. Usually, your entire extended family lived there - and all of your family's fortunes were tied up in the land there (whether you had slaves or not). Even if you did not have slaves, you knew that the economy there would collapse if slavery were abolished. A collapsed economy would ruin the value of your land, or kill your business. There was no state assistance, no safety net. If the North got their way - your family could actually, literally starve.

 

Look - I'm on the Yanks' side here. But it makes no sense to villify and demean the people of the South who were dealing with a whole different cultural paradigm and an entirely different set of economic circumstances. The institution of slavery had been around for hundreds of years there - and those who fought in the Civil War had been born into the slave economy. It is very easy to just codenm them on face value - but do you really think that the thousands of Southerners were all actually evil people??? How could they be? In order to understand what happened, we all have to step away from our knee-jerk reactions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The economy of the North was not based soley on agriculture as it was in outh atthe time. Many people lived and worked in cities in industrial jobs. In the South, there were few other job opportunities.

 

But that isn't what I said.

 

There were many states that had farm based economies in the North.

 

Yes, there were industrialized areas but there was also many farmers who believed in making their way without enslaving another person.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree. Unfortunately, this kind of discussion always splits into those two distinct arguments. Those who defend the flag see it as a cultural symbol because they are able to do so. They have never been hurt by its use or been affected by the message that some choose to send by flying it. Those who have been understand quite clearly the message it sends now, and cannot look past that to see it as simply a "piece of history".

 

Yeah - I try very hard not to judge a person (at least right away) when I see the flag.... but I have to admit I can't entirely get it out of my head that they are possibly racist. I'm white, no AA relatives that I know of, so I was not personally affected.... but I still have a hard time with the "historical" factor. I do try, though, to step away from my immediate biases. I guess if I was a Southerner with relatives from the war, I may feel differently. But when you add in the Civil Rights issue.... maybe that's just too recent - too raw?

Link to post
Share on other sites
You say that from a warm house wih plenty of food in the refrigerator. You actuall have no idea what you would have done for your kids in that situation.

 

Huh??? Uh, yes I actually do. There are some things I know, for certain, I would not do under any circumstances.

 

And many in those same situations chose otherwise. I don't think it can be debated that farming in the South was easier than in some of the Northern states, including some which were Abolitionist bastions.

 

:iagree: And as for looking at the situation through a modern day lens-- hogwash! Were there no people at the time saying keeping slaves was wrong? It's not like they'd never heard the idea before.

Link to post
Share on other sites
You say that from a warm house wih plenty of food in the refrigerator. You actuall have no idea what you would have done for your kids in that situation.

 

Oh, for Christ's sake.

 

Are you really trying to argue that poor, hungry, shivering Southerners had to go out and get themselves some slaves because, driven into poverty by Northern economic oppression, they had no other option for economic survival?

 

Slaves represented an enormous investment of capital. Poor white Southerners whose children had empty bellies didn't own slaves. They couldn't afford to buy them. Given that the price of a "prime field hand" was $1800 in 1860 (source here), a small-time farmer who was shivering and hungry who did already have slaves could sell one and buy some food for his kids.

 

The existence of slavery depressed economic conditions for poor white Southerners. It didn't raise them. The fact that the economy was heavily overinvested in agriculture and slave labor mitigated against the rise of industry and urbanization. The existence of ample slave labor depressed the job market for free laborers.

 

Of course, during and after the Civil War there was widespread desperate poverty and hunger in the South. That's what happens when you fight a war on your own territory and have to neglect your agricultural production. But before the war it is simply ridiculous to say that slaveowners were poor or just getting by.

Link to post
Share on other sites
As for the bravery of the Southern soldiers -

There were actually many soldiers in the Confederate army who agreed with the North on the slavery issue - but decided to fight for their home state anyway. For a variety of reasons - but one of them was that even then, there was a lot less "US" pride and a lot more state pride.

 

The state you were raised in was very important to you. Usually, your entire extended family lived there - and all of your family's fortunes were tied up in the land there (whether you had slaves or not). Even if you did not have slaves, you knew that the economy there would collapse if slavery were abolished. A collapsed economy would ruin the value of your land, or kill your business. There was no state assistance, no safety net. If the North got their way - your family could actually, literally starve.

 

Look - I'm on the Yanks' side here. But it makes no sense to villify and demean the people of the South who were dealing with a whole different cultural paradigm and an entirely different set of economic circumstances. The institution of slavery had been around for hundreds of years there - and those who fought in the Civil War had been born into the slave economy. It is very easy to just codenm them on face value - but do you really think that the thousands of Southerners were all actually evil people??? How could they be? In order to understand what happened, we all have to step away from our knee-jerk reactions.

 

 

I don't believe anyone has called those who fought for the south "evil". I do believe they fought for a system that was quite evil, and they did so believing it was in their best interest (however, it was that very system that was actually holding the south back). I can *understand*why they did what they did, but that does not mean I will condone it or call those who fought for the south courageous. I also cannot understand why someone now feels the need to celebrate what their great-great-great grandfather did at the battle of Antietam, and why they would choose to do so flying the same flag proudly displayed by the KKK. It just doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh, for Christ's sake.

 

Are you really trying to argue that poor, hungry, shivering Southerners had to go out and get themselves some slaves because, driven into poverty by Northern economic oppression, they had no other option for economic survival?

 

Slaves represented an enormous investment of capital. Poor white Southerners whose children had empty bellies didn't own slaves. They couldn't afford to buy them. Given that the price of a "prime field hand" was $1800 in 1860 (source here), a small-time farmer who was shivering and hungry who did already have slaves could sell one and buy some food for his kids.

 

The existence of slavery depressed economic conditions for poor white Southerners. It didn't raise them. The fact that the economy was heavily overinvested in agriculture and slave labor mitigated against the rise of industry and urbanization. The existence of ample slave labor depressed the job market for free laborers.

 

Of course, during and after the Civil War there was widespread desperate poverty and hunger in the South. That's what happens when you fight a war on your own territory and have to neglect your agricultural production. But before the war it is simply ridiculous to say that slaveowners were poor or just getting by.

 

One correction - the south was poorer than the north on both a real and a per capita basis.

I do agree that southerners didn't march off to war because they were poor/starving.

Many wars have been referred to as "a rich man's war but a poor man's fight", and the Civil War is a perfect example.

Link to post
Share on other sites
One correction - the south was poorer than the north on both a real and a per capita basis.

I do agree that southerners didn't march off to war because they were poor/starving.

Many wars have been referred to as "a rich man's war but a poor man's fight", and the Civil War is a perfect example.

 

Her claim was actually that Southerns owned slaves because they were poor and starving.

 

I do understand that the South was poorer than the North. One reason was the lack of urbanization and industrialization. The article I linked to goes into a good explanation of how the dependence on slavery prevented economic development in the South.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't believe anyone has called those who fought for the south "evil". I do believe they fought for a system that was quite evil, and they did so believing it was in their best interest (however, it was that very system that was actually holding the south back). I can *understand*why they did what they did, but that does not mean I will condone it or call those who fought for the south courageous. I also cannot understand why someone now feels the need to celebrate what their great-great-great grandfather did at the battle of Antietam, and why they would choose to do so flying the same flag proudly displayed by the KKK. It just doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

 

I don't condone it either, but it does help me understand it - at least in an academic way. It is impossible for me to really understand it - I'll admit I have never been able to make that mental leap.

 

Doesn't really make sense to me either, but neither does American Idol or The Bachelor :D Sorry - not trying to make light - although the thread could use a little less intensity.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah - I try very hard not to judge a person (at least right away) when I see the flag.... but I have to admit I can't entirely get it out of my head that they are possibly racist. I'm white, no AA relatives that I know of, so I was not personally affected.... but I still have a hard time with the "historical" factor. I do try, though, to step away from my immediate biases. I guess if I was a Southerner with relatives from the war, I may feel differently. But when you add in the Civil Rights issue.... maybe that's just too recent - too raw?

 

Absolutely, it is hard to fight that gut reaction, but if you haven't seen it first hand it may be hard to understand. I'm white, also, and grew up in a very segregated Southern town (and I'm not that old, just some places in the South are about 20 years behind the rest of the world). Though desegregation was law, that doesn't mean it happened everywhere in 1960-something. People just stayed in their comfort zone for a while. But at some point, people say "No more!"

 

So what do I remember? The local swimming lake where we went every summer: The owners were told that by law they could not exclude blacks anymore so they shut the place down instead. A local restaurant that hosted the monthly meetings of those in white hoods was told they must serve everyone: Suddenly the place becomes decorated in historical paraphernalia (like the confederate flag) that makes it clear who is not welcome. A black family looks at a house in a white neighborhood: Several neighbors hoist their confederate flags or hang them on the mailbox to make it clear who is not wanted. (Cross-burning became a crime, but hanging a flag from history was OK.) Apparently from this list, it's not true everywhere, but in many small towns, the flag became the more subtle symbol of "whites only" when the law made them take down the actual signs.

 

I still get that sick feeling and I don't patronize businesses that prominently display the flag. I just can't. I try not to pre-judge those who just paste it on the back of their pick-up truck, but I approach with caution. Maybe they just grew up in a different world than I did.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't believe anyone has called those who fought for the south "evil". I do believe they fought for a system that was quite evil, and they did so believing it was in their best interest (however, it was that very system that was actually holding the south back). I can *understand*why they did what they did, but that does not mean I will condone it or call those who fought for the south courageous. I also cannot understand why someone now feels the need to celebrate what their great-great-great grandfather did at the battle of Antietam, and why they would choose to do so flying the same flag proudly displayed by the KKK. It just doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

 

Yes, there was a post on here by Sis that equated southerners duringthe ciil War wit Hitler and the Nazis. If that's not calling them evil, don't know what is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rivka, at no point did I say that a southerner owned a slave because he was poor. Over 75 of the people in the South did not own even one slave. Many fought in the Civil War because they felt a duty to there family and to keep what little they had.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Rivka, at no point did I say that a southerner owned a slave because he was poor. Over 75 of the people in the South did not own even one slave. Many fought in the Civil War because they felt a duty to there family and to keep what little they had.

 

You mean "their." Sorry, it's a pet peeve of mine.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Absolutely, it is hard to fight that gut reaction, but if you haven't seen it first hand it may be hard to understand. I'm white, also, and grew up in a very segregated Southern town (and I'm not that old, just some places in the South are about 20 years behind the rest of the world). Though desegregation was law, that doesn't mean it happened everywhere in 1960-something. People just stayed in their comfort zone for a while. But at some point, people say "No more!"

 

So what do I remember? The local swimming lake where we went every summer: The owners were told that by law they could not exclude blacks anymore so they shut the place down instead. A local restaurant that hosted the monthly meetings of those in white hoods was told they must serve everyone: Suddenly the place becomes decorated in historical paraphernalia (like the confederate flag) that makes it clear who is not welcome. A black family looks at a house in a white neighborhood: Several neighbors hoist their confederate flags or hang them on the mailbox to make it clear who is not wanted. (Cross-burning became a crime, but hanging a flag from history was OK.) Apparently from this list, it's not true everywhere, but in many small towns, the flag became the more subtle symbol of "whites only" when the law made them take down the actual signs.

 

I still get that sick feeling and I don't patronize businesses that prominently display the flag. I just can't. I try not to pre-judge those who just paste it on the back of their pick-up truck, but I approach with caution. Maybe they just grew up in a different world than I did.

 

This is so well said. My students had an assignment to interview a person who had lived through and remembered life during the Civil Rights era. It was a difficult assignment, and I had to remind them not to make judgements or get angry with the person. I was actually taking a risk because I knew how racists a couple of teachers and a couple of members of the school board were. We had an amazing and enlightening time of discussion about the interviews. They di grow up in a different world than you or I did.

Link to post
Share on other sites
You mean "their." Sorry, it's a pet peeve of mine.

You are right. I aso leftout the % sign for 75%.

 

I know it wasn't you I addressd the original post to, but I do apologize. You are right thatis rude and uncalled for. It closes off people and causes bad feelings.

 

We obviously aren't going to agree on this issue, and I don't really know you as a person. I hope we find other things that we can agree on in the future.

Edited by leeannpal
Link to post
Share on other sites
And, fwiw, the correct use of the verb phrase in your 7th sentence is "have gone", not "have went". Sorry, a petpeeve of mine.

 

Are you kidding? Nearly every post you have made in this thread is riddled with spelling and grammatical errors. Some of your sentences are nearly illegible. The fact that you are doing this on a homeschool board while bashing homeschooling sort of outs you as the trolliest of trolls.

 

Eta: I minored in history/archeology and majored in literature. I have a firm grasp of history. I have extensive knowledge of how to form a logical argument. I know how to source my arguments. "Because I said so," is never a valid argument.

 

Like Sis, I am from Oklahoma; my dh is from Texas. We have lived in Virginia and North Carolina. We own guns. DH hunts. I have ancestors who fought on both sides of the Civil War. My grandmother was chief of our tribe. My other grandmother was ashamed of her Sioux heritage and avoided telling people about it. I went to school with black kids and kids with confederate flag stickers covering the Native American shield on their license plates. I understand this issue on several levels.

Edited by Mrs Mungo
Link to post
Share on other sites
I can *understand*why they did what they did, but that does not mean I will condone it or call those who fought for the south courageous. I also cannot understand why someone now feels the need to celebrate what their great-great-great grandfather did at the battle of Antietam, and why they would choose to do so flying the same flag proudly displayed by the KKK. It just doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

 

Simply because you do not understand it does not mean that such feelings are not valid or heartfelt.

 

As to the flag, the last KKK rally that I saw (on TV as I would never even be in the area of one as I would not give them the sense of importance by watching in person) had Old Glory flying. Should I now not fly my flag?

 

As to courage would you explain what about charging massed artillery or facing a Union charge is NOT courageous? Would you explain how being willing to die, and then doing so, for one's beliefs is NOT courageous? Tell me how the men who charged with Pickett did not display incredible courage. Unless you can explain why they were NOT courageous then perhaps one is left with the conclusion that you are deceiving yourself. Such deception may make you feel better but is poor academic practice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Long thread. I have been reading it off and on all day.

 

I live in the South. I would never display the flag. I did not understand the visceral fight against changing it in our state a few years back.

 

I live outside of Stone Mountain Park where we have a pretty amazing laser show every night in the summer. It always ends with a big tribute to the war including Elvis Presley singing Dixie. I never understood all the patriotism towards it. It is really strange to sit there and watch it when you are surrounded by African Americans who are cheering for it is well. :001_huh:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Are you kidding? Nearly every post you have made in this thread is riddled with spelling and grammatical errors. Some of your sentences are nearly illegible. The fact that you are doing this on a homeschool board while bashing homeschooling sort of outs you as the trolliest of trolls.

 

Eta: I minored in history/archeology and majored in literature. I have a firm grasp of history. I have extensive knowledge of how to form a logical argument. I know how to source my arguments. "Because I said so," is never a valid argument.

 

Like Sis, I am from Oklahoma; my dh is from Texas. We have lived in Virginia and North Carolina. We own guns. DH hunts. I have ancestors who fought on both sides of the Civil War. My grandmother was chief of our tribe. My other grandmother was ashamed of her Sioux heritage and avoided telling people about it. I went to school with black kids and kids with confederate flag stickers covering the Native American shield on their license plates. I understand this issue on several levels.

 

I explained the problem with my keyboard in an earlier post and, I

am now on my husband's computer and shouldn't have that problem.

 

I can assure you that I am not a troll. Where am I bashing homeschoolers? I am going to be one in the next year. I have great respect for homeschoolers.

 

I also apologized for that remark in an earlier post.

Edited by leeannpal
Link to post
Share on other sites
For example? I can point you to sources that say most anything-we never landed on the moon, aliens shot JFK, Dick Cheney is a robot, etc. They may not be credible sources, but it is better than "I said so."

 

There is such a thing as common knowledge. We know that the Eqyptians built the pyramids, but most people don't demand that sources be cited to prove it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm sure some members of the Wehrmacht acted courageously in WWII. So what?

 

Being courageous loses its attachments to virtuousness when one fights in an unjust cause, and for unjust ends.

 

Bill

 

 

I never said that courage and virtue went hand in hand, simply that one should respect courage.

 

Those in Gray who died were frequently courageous to deny that is to deny history, poor practice and it gets one nowhere.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I never said that courage and virtue went hand in hand, simply that one should respect courage.

 

Those in Gray who died were frequently courageous to deny that is to deny history, poor practice and it gets one nowhere.

 

Why should one respect courage when it is used for unvirtious ends?

 

What should be respected is the courage of a man or woman who says: No, I won't kill in the name of evil causes just because my compatriots are going bad things. That is true moral courage.

 

Bill

Link to post
Share on other sites
Why should one respect courage when it is used for unvirtious ends?

 

What should be respected is the courage of a man or woman who says: No, I won't kill in the name of evil causes just because my compatriots are going bad things. That is true moral courage.

 

Bill

 

Ask your Father he might be able to explain that one to you, (given what you have told us) he seems like a man of great courage and character who, also (given what you have told us), could respect his enemy even when fighting him. He may have insight that you do not about respecting certain facets of an enemy and his character.

 

Indeed ask any veteran, the answer is almost unanimous. A friend of mine who fought the Germans and despised them still stated that they fought like lions and that it was the only thing he respected about them. Well he also said that they had pretty good aircraft, better than his at the start of the war.

Edited by pqr
Link to post
Share on other sites
Ask your Father he might be able to explain that one to you, (given what you have told us) he seems like a man of great courage and character who, also (given what you have told us), could respect his enemy even when fighting him. He may have insight that you do not about respecting certain facets of an enemy and his character.

Indeed ask any veteran, the answer is almost unanimous. A friend of mine who fought the Germans and despised them still stated that they fought like lions and that it was the only thing he respected about them. Well he also said that they had pretty good aircraft, better than his at the start of the war.

 

I'm wondering what wars (and on whose side) your father and grandfather's fought in PQR, since you claim to come from a thousand year long line of fighting men?

 

Fighting bravely for Nazism or for Tojo just proves the point that "courage" can be used towards very bad ends.

 

Bill

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm wondering what wars your father and grandfather's fought in PQR, since you claim to come from a thousand year long line of fighting men?

 

Fighting bravely for Nazism or for Tojo just proves the point that "courage" can be used towards very bad ends.

 

Bill

 

Of course courage can be used to bad ends but it still need be respected. Surely you understand that.

 

Do you deny the courage of the Confederates or does your hatred of them blind you?

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.


×
×
  • Create New...