petep
Legend
Posts: 26,021
|
Post by petep on Jul 21, 2020 18:13:45 GMT
Murders are skyrocketing in the dem run cities. Riots, looting, massive destruction of property, killing
Solution. Let’s tear down the statue of Christopher Columbus
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2020 18:41:51 GMT
Another empty Fiddler tirade; ironically, he's making conclusions not in evidence. I've parried every attempt to portray the history of the era as the laughably cartoonish, intellectually weak fiction that you folks have thrust into this discussion.
This is a tough subject to master; most people don't have the intelligence to understand the complexities of the rift between North and South as I do. An intelligent man would have long ago realized that the issues and motivations of that time were just as labyrinthine as are those of today, perhaps more so. But to admit to that fact is to commit a grave sin against the religion of political correctness and the cult of Lincoln; it is blasphemy to dare to vocalize that the South had a legitimate grievance, a legal right to secede and an honorable cause that was not about slavery.
But that reality IS why the former Confederates were revered after the war by those who lived through that time.
Like Martin Luther at the Wittenburg church door, I've stood against these Lincolnite priests and their mindless screams of "heretic!" and I'm still here. If you'd actually won anything, this thread would have been a lot shorter. Sorry for your loss.
Bless your heart.
Nobody else involved in this discussion is denying the interconnectedness of all things antebellum. Rather, it is you who are denying the undeniable importance, impact and influence of slavery on all aspects of life in America, from our beginning until this very day. And though you are failing in that effort, you are succeeding as a racist, so much so in fact that you have become the forum apologist for the very institution of slavery that the rest of us so rightfully and righteously despise. You are not a scholar. You are a denialist. You do not enlighten. You darken. You muddle. You obfuscate. You bury. And all the while, you pretend to hold and defend a rhetorical high ground which does not exist. An imaginary high ground, which if it did exist, would and could only be the trash heap of denialist history. But you guard it anyway, yapping and ankle biting, then yelping and claiming victory while the rest of us wonder what's wrong with you. Sure the South had grievances. Who doesn't? But to deny the undeniable importance of the issue of slavery on this country is to almost entirely miss the point. So much so, in truth, that it disqualifies the denier. My only question for you is this: Why do you do it? What about this issue so fascinates, motivates and animates you? Why are you such a denialist kook? Why do you post your doggerel in such a vertical manner? Methinks your "tall" metered text is intended to compensate for something in your life that is excessively short.
There's no racism involved in what I have posted; anyone that makes such an accusation against me just looks that much more the fool for resorting to such dishonest smear tactics. I've always said that slavery was a horrible evil practice and will continue to do so. But in the mid 19th century it was just as legal and just as controversial as abortion is today (abortion is far worse, but that's for another thread).
Why do you blindly accept the Northern lies about that period of time without sufficient evidence? Why do you demand that I must conform? Is that your idea of tolerance?
Why am I vilified for pointing out that the alleged evidence behind "slavery is the cause" chant (a quasi religious cantillation) is painfully thin, weak and laughable?
Why do I do this, you ask? Because the prevailing narrative is just not true. And, in actuality, those who scream "denialist!", "racist!", "kook!" are little more than unthinking lemmings who would rather cry "heretic!" as you have rather than to have to intelligently and objectively look at the whole picture.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2020 18:49:21 GMT
You've taken apart nothing. You just ignore or dismiss out of hand. Ten pages in, I think it's farcical to claim that I have ignored any of the propaganda thrown my way. I've addressed it all head on.
In every case, I've employed logic to show the weakness and laziness behind the false "slavery is the cause" mantra.
Why are you ignoring the fact that I have shown the logically fallacious nature of the narratives that say the slavery was the South's cause or that white supremacy was the reason for the erection of the post war monuments.
Why are YOU ignoring the indisputable case that I have made?
|
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,211
|
Post by demos on Jul 21, 2020 18:51:28 GMT
Indisputable? ROFLMAO.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2020 19:02:08 GMT
I don't think so. He's not saying that nothing matters. He's mainly saying that the truth doesn't matter. But he is also pissing on history, crapping on context and picking at a scab rather than letting it heal. He doesn't seem to care about the harm that can be done by people with attitudes not unlike his own. People who won't win well. People who are neither graceful nor gracious even in victory. Especially when their most important victory came by birthright, time and place, and not by anything they themselves did to earn or deserve it. In fact, they came to it as heirs of ancestors who discovered the natives to death, while importing darker ones from African to own and use as slaves, for centuries. FOR CENTURIES. HUNDREDS OF YEARS. But paleo doesn't seem to care about that. No, he'd rather rehash his reject-from-the-KKK-wannabe-academy thesis about the Civil War being caused by a careless caress or a hormone imbalance. Meh, maybe you're right after all.
While there's nothing cogent or historically applicable in the rant above, he sure got in his licks, didn't he? One insult after another but no substance at all. Definitely must be compensating for something that he lacks. After all, it takes intelligence to have an objective conversation about this subject, and there's none in evidence in the tantrum above.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2020 19:04:34 GMT
You sure haven't successfully disputed any of it nor has anyone else here. That's a pretty good sign that it's "indisputable". |
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,211
|
Post by demos on Jul 21, 2020 19:06:56 GMT
You sure haven't successfully disputed any of it nor has anyone else here. Of course, because you dismiss everything that contradicts your narrative out of hand. You never actually refute it. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2020 19:13:23 GMT
I don't think slavery is the reason the statues are being taken down. I think that's a pretext. They're being taken down for another, bigger reason, but I'm not sure what it is. It might be to undermine whiteness. It might be to dehistoricize society. The objective is probably to dissolve some form of social unity that the statues act as adhesive for. Remove the adhesive, remove the unity. Remove the unity, make weak. The question is what they are trying to make weak, and what the purpose is for making it weak. Which gets into the question of, not what the old order is that they are trying to dissolve, but what the new order is they ware wanting to establish in its place, which requires first that the old order be dissolved (the old one-two of revolution: tear down, then build). Good question, DMan. Here's the answer:
Really, what does any of this have to do with the killing of George Floyd in Minnesota? Never let a crisis go to waste? These monuments had and have NOTHING to do with the police or any of the perceived economic inequities. The destruction of these monuments is not hurting law enforcement or the elites that you say need correction today. It's hurting the regular folks that happen to have an equally legitimate, but alternative interpretation of history.
Removing these monuments is equivalent to erasing history by removing any symbols that might make folks curious enough to do a little thinking and research on their own, even if they initially disagree with the historical interpretation reflected by the monuments. It makes them think and decide for themselves. That's why the monuments have stood for 120 years; the American value of respect for differing opinions and interpretations.
And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed – if all records told the same tale – then the lie passed into history and became truth. 'Who controls the past,' ran the Party slogan, 'controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.' And yet the past, though of its nature alterable, never had been altered. Whatever was true now was true from everlasting to everlasting. It was quite simple. All that was needed was an unending series of victories over your own memory. 'Reality control,' they called it: in Newspeak, 'doublethink.' - Orwell 1984
THAT'S what the monument destruction is all about.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2020 19:25:54 GMT
You sure haven't successfully disputed any of it nor has anyone else here. Of course, because you dismiss everything that contradicts your narrative out of hand. You never actually refute it. Why would I dismiss something that is so easily shown to be a logical fallacy based on very thin "evidence" which is easily countered? Here's the gaping hole in your "dismissal" idea: I'm the one advocating for more details, more complexity, a nuanced interpretation, and the bigger picture. I want to add more to the story while it's actually YOU that wants to dismiss any additional information that might dilute your biased conclusions based on 21st century political considerations. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2020 20:57:02 GMT
Any neutral party reading this discussion will conclude that the neo-confederate revisionists haven't had a single thoughtful or interesting thing to say in response to the arguments and evidence presented in this thread.
Talking about farts doesn't cut it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2020 22:06:00 GMT
Any neutral party reading this discussion will conclude that the neo-confederate revisionists haven't had a single thoughtful or interesting thing to say in response to the arguments and evidence presented in this thread. Talking about farts doesn't cut it. Any intelligent person reading this discussion would conclude that the Lincolnite cult becaome apoplectic when folks like me expsoe them to complex information that messes with their confirmation biases. Any conclusions reached as to the cause of secession and the subsequent war should always based on statistically confirmed evidence and sound logical methods (rather than the emotional response directed at me) and such conclusions should always require more than a handful of talking points from elitists and examples from a few documents.
Do you base all of life's other conclusions on evidence as sparse and as weak as what you have presented here? Confirmation bias, indeed.
My indisputable conclusions on this thread are based on common sense and a curiosity to find out about the whole story, which is typically more diverse and complex than you seem able to accept. Have you been so conditioned that you can't see that the Confederates were just people with complex motivations and ideas...no less so than we do today?
The rejection of any diversity of THOUGHT on this subject is pretty Orwellian. The Lincolnite zealots here not only disagree, but seek to insult, ridicule and disparage....in other words, CANCEL....anyone like who dares to challenge their weak "evidence".
As far as the flatulence analogy, that one evidently cut pretty deep since you keep bringing it up. Pretty clever, that. I addressed your dedication speech absurdity by being absurd.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2020 23:25:23 GMT
The only person talking about Lincoln and farting is you, dear sir.
|
|
bama beau
Legend
Fish will piss anywhere. They just live in water.
Posts: 11,585
|
Post by bama beau on Jul 22, 2020 3:06:16 GMT
Nobody else involved in this discussion is denying the interconnectedness of all things antebellum. Rather, it is you who are denying the undeniable importance, impact and influence of slavery on all aspects of life in America, from our beginning until this very day. And though you are failing in that effort, you are succeeding as a racist, so much so in fact that you have become the forum apologist for the very institution of slavery that the rest of us so rightfully and righteously despise. You are not a scholar. You are a denialist. You do not enlighten. You darken. You muddle. You obfuscate. You bury. And all the while, you pretend to hold and defend a rhetorical high ground which does not exist. An imaginary high ground, which if it did exist, would and could only be the trash heap of denialist history. But you guard it anyway, yapping and ankle biting, then yelping and claiming victory while the rest of us wonder what's wrong with you. Sure the South had grievances. Who doesn't? But to deny the undeniable importance of the issue of slavery on this country is to almost entirely miss the point. So much so, in truth, that it disqualifies the denier. My only question for you is this: Why do you do it? What about this issue so fascinates, motivates and animates you? Why are you such a denialist kook? Why do you post your doggerel in such a vertical manner? Methinks your "tall" metered text is intended to compensate for something in your life that is excessively short.
There's no racism involved in what I have posted; anyone that makes such an accusation against me just looks that much more the fool for resorting to such dishonest smear tactics. I've always said that slavery was a horrible evil practice and will continue to do so. But in the mid 19th century it was just as legal and just as controversial as abortion is today (abortion is far worse, but that's for another thread).
Why do you blindly accept the Northern lies about that period of time without sufficient evidence? Why do you demand that I must conform? Is that your idea of tolerance?
Why am I vilified for pointing out that the alleged evidence behind "slavery is the cause" chant (a quasi religious cantillation) is painfully thin, weak and laughable?
Why do I do this, you ask? Because the prevailing narrative is just not true. And, in actuality, those who scream "denialist!", "racist!", "kook!" are little more than unthinking lemmings who would rather cry "heretic!" as you have rather than to have to intelligently and objectively look at the whole picture.
Firstly, did this discussion just take a turn for the sexual, big boy? Because if it did, I would appreciate you leaving me out, thanks kindly. If you see something phallic in my prose, please don't try to blame me. What you see or think you see, or feel because of it, is entirely on you. I realize that you realize that you have been judged and found lacking. Your response demonstrates that. But enough with the projection, doll. Secondly, you're not being vilified for anything other than your defense of and/or apologies for villainy. Stop doing that, and you'll probably be fine. |
|
bama beau
Legend
Fish will piss anywhere. They just live in water.
Posts: 11,585
|
Post by bama beau on Jul 22, 2020 3:09:18 GMT
Any neutral party reading this discussion will conclude that the neo-confederate revisionists haven't had a single thoughtful or interesting thing to say in response to the arguments and evidence presented in this thread. Talking about farts doesn't cut it. I think paleocon was flirting, though. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but I do believe it to be worthy of note. |
|
RWB
Legend
Posts: 12,818
|
Post by RWB on Jul 22, 2020 3:43:13 GMT
Any neutral party reading this discussion will conclude that the neo-confederate revisionists haven't had a single thoughtful or interesting thing to say in response to the arguments and evidence presented in this thread. Talking about farts doesn't cut it. I think paleocon was flirting, though. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but I do believe it to be worthy of note. careful You know how jealous Ulysses gets |
|
bama beau
Legend
Fish will piss anywhere. They just live in water.
Posts: 11,585
|
Post by bama beau on Jul 22, 2020 4:25:52 GMT
I think paleocon was flirting, though. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but I do believe it to be worthy of note. careful You know how jealous Ulysses gets He can be such a bitch! He'll be better sometime after he stops gloating in Nov/Dec/Jan. I suspect it'll be close to the time when Biden/Whomever has to start governing. |
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,115
|
Post by Odysseus on Jul 22, 2020 5:34:21 GMT
careful You know how jealous Ulysses gets He can be such a bitch! He'll be better sometime after he stops gloating in Nov/Dec/Jan. I suspect it'll be close to the time when Biden/Whomever has to start governing.
I have no problem with you or anyone else sharing your phallic imagery laden poetry, although you might consider doing it privately. Maybe you, RWB, and Paleocuck can make it a threesome. NTTAWWT.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fiddler on Jul 22, 2020 13:24:24 GMT
What's funniest about this is all the white bois complaining about statues being taken down, and none of them do anything about it. Keep backing up, white boi! Cower in the corner so massa black don't whip you.
Yea.. That's what's happening.. . You nailed it. I'm astonished that you can type with those lash marks bleeding like that.
|
|
petep
Legend
Posts: 26,021
|
Post by petep on Jul 22, 2020 13:43:23 GMT
I was listening to a radio show on npr the other day, someone (on the left) raised a good point...he said people are all up in arms about these statues, and in many cases, the "other side" is conceding and taking them down, or changing the name of a sports team..and its portrayed as a big win for the side who wants them taken down...
but the person went on to say it really seems like a shell game, because the real root causes are not getting addressed, and its almost like those agreeing to remove these statues or change the names are actually conning the others, because they are really not doing anything about substantial things...its like OK, you got what you wanted, we changed the name, now lets get back to business as usual..
so the statue gets pulled down...and now what...the murder rates are still thru the roof, peoples perceptions have not changed etc...
In many respects he is right...what he was arguing for, or stating, is the people demanding these names get changed, or statues taken down, are making a big mistake, because these things are really cursory to their real issues, and the other side is looking at this as token giveaways, and will say ok we did what you wanted, now move on...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 22, 2020 14:20:56 GMT
Why do you post your doggerel in such a vertical manner? Methinks your "tall" metered text is intended to compensate for something in your life that is excessively short.
There's no racism involved in what I have posted; anyone that makes such an accusation against me just looks that much more the fool for resorting to such dishonest smear tactics. I've always said that slavery was a horrible evil practice and will continue to do so. But in the mid 19th century it was just as legal and just as controversial as abortion is today (abortion is far worse, but that's for another thread).
Why do you blindly accept the Northern lies about that period of time without sufficient evidence? Why do you demand that I must conform? Is that your idea of tolerance?
Why am I vilified for pointing out that the alleged evidence behind "slavery is the cause" chant (a quasi religious cantillation) is painfully thin, weak and laughable?
Why do I do this, you ask? Because the prevailing narrative is just not true. And, in actuality, those who scream "denialist!", "racist!", "kook!" are little more than unthinking lemmings who would rather cry "heretic!" as you have rather than to have to intelligently and objectively look at the whole picture.
Firstly, did this discussion just take a turn for the sexual, big boy? Because if it did, I would appreciate you leaving me out, thanks kindly. If you see something phallic in my prose, please don't try to blame me. What you see or think you see, or feel because of it, is entirely on you. I realize that you realize that you have been judged and found lacking. Your response demonstrates that. But enough with the projection, doll. Secondly, you're not being vilified for anything other than your defense of and/or apologies for villainy. Stop doing that, and you'll probably be fine. Hey, you're the one who proudly posts using this oddly vertical prose, not me. If you feel the need to compensate for something that's undoubtedly below average, that's up to you, "stubby".
But what you do seem to have in abundance is historical ignorance; "villainy" is far more applicable to Lincoln and his minions as I have repeatedly shown. The damage that they did to this republic is comparable to Rome's descent into authoritarianism under Augustus
|
|
