Login Register

charlottesville antics
#46
Huh, interesting. So they had support as long as they stopped slavery? I honestly thought it was more like 1. the union wanted to free slaves, 2. the confederates were like no way dude so they rebelled and then yeah 3. there is war, and the union stomped their ass.
[Image: 4761558c1f.png]
Reply
#47
(08-24-2017, 12:07 AM)grue Wrote: Huh, interesting. So they had support as long as they stopped slavery? I honestly thought it was more like 1. the union wanted to free slaves, 2. the confederates were like no way dude so they rebelled and then yeah 3. there is war, and the union stomped their ass.

The voting system in the US was weird at the time. There were creation of free and slave states, which helped balance the voting process so it was neither the south nor the north having more power over the other. Lincoln was a pro-abolitionist and eventually the north got enough power to where they would have always voting in who they wanted. The south, thinking this was entirely bullshit since the north was more federalist than states rights, broke away from the north. It wasn't until Lincoln went to take back a fort "rightfully the USAs" which made the south fire upon them, starting the war. Lee was a smart man and knew how to war, which was causing havoc behind the enemies lines, going in and raiding supplies and such to fuel their war effort. It was successful, but the south could only do it for so long without outside support, since their population density was so low.

Lincoln, who started this war with the intention of bringing the states back into the union, realized that if France or Britain joined, the north would be royally fucked. So, Lincoln spoke one day and said "yo, all dem slaves in the south are now free" which turned the war from a war between two nations to a righteous war on moral grounds. Since the abolition movements were strong in both France and Britain, they refused to join. 

So, since the north had more troops than the south, and a steady supply of irish and germans immigrating, Grant just kept throwing bodies at Lee until he surrendered his army. Lee would have still put up a good fight, if Gettysburg didn't cripple his army. That, as well as Sherman marching towards Savanna, a major port city in Georgia, burning every fucking city and town they see, then moving north towards the capital.
[-] The following 1 user Likes Delirious Biznasty Good Egg's post:
  • grue Moderator
Reply
#48
Wow thanks, I actually had it wrong. Neat.
[Image: 4761558c1f.png]
Reply
#49
lol Ben i hope you actually friend friends that value you one day, but without a dramatic overhaul in your personality and a serious change to all of your complexes that you desperately hold onto, i truly doubt it. you'll slide further and further into alt right territory until someone puts you out of your misery, or you do yourself. sooner rather than later, i can only hope.
[Image: NSiuXpT.jpg]
Reply
#50
(08-24-2017, 12:45 AM)grue Wrote: Wow thanks, I actually had it wrong. Neat.

yes slightly bothers me a tiny tiny bit that people today will spin the civil war as a war to end slavery when it only became that mid-war & to win the war. lincoln is still a hero tho
Reply
#51
(08-24-2017, 02:00 AM)fat lesbian Wrote: lol Ben i hope you actually friend friends that value you one day, but without a dramatic overhaul in your personality and a serious change to all of your complexes that you desperately hold onto, i truly doubt it. you'll slide further and further into alt right territory until someone puts you out of your misery, or you do yourself. sooner rather than later, i can only hope.

Puke
The one and only king of cums.
[-] The following 4 users Like GeorgeBubbinzInSpace's post:
  • Alienator, Ben, Delirious Biznasty Good Egg, narcissa
Reply
#52
(08-24-2017, 03:31 AM)shagg Wrote:
(08-24-2017, 12:45 AM)grue Wrote: Wow thanks, I actually had it wrong. Neat.

yes slightly bothers me a tiny tiny bit that people today will spin the civil war as a war to end slavery when it only became that mid-war & to win the war. lincoln is still a hero tho

It started over the high amount of abolitionist movements in the north and Lincoln being an abolitionist sympathizer 

The south saw it as a way to choke them of their source of income and to have impunity to do so. It goes back to the creation of the constitution and the 3/5th compromise. So yes, it was about states rights to determine if they choose to be a free state or a slave state, which was to have the right to keep and use a tool which was a major part of their economy making it a war about slavery. The emancipation proclamation was a way to drive the point home.
Reply
#53
ok so my thoughts on whats going on,

I feel like there's some things getting lost in the media and/or people are not engaging with so heres a quick list of ideas/questions I have:

- I think confederate statues/memorials should be taken out of public spaces. but the process how this is happening seems pretty fucked and feels like bait. i don't think people should tear them down without a civil process & the statues should go into museums // civil war exhibits. now no one can make the argument we are destroying//replacing history. but sometimes history belongs behind closed doors.

- conservatives have been worried about Antifa for quite sometime now before charlotteville & they do not simply shut down nazi's. they have turned up & intervened in free speech across universities to stop ppl like Ben Shapiro and Ann Coulter from speaking. it appears they simply do not like conservatives//republicans across the board, and I feel this is the triggering reason why Trump and others have been attempting to bring them into the discussion as much as the white nationalists. but they are butchering how they discuss antifa by comparing them to nazis, so then the media rips them apart. the media does not cover the grand context of antifa either. I'm worried the media will allow these behaviors to continue by acting like everyone antifa opposes must be for morally sound reasons instead of political ones.

- I don't think Trump is a major major factor in this "rise of white nationalism". i don't even think there's a rise, people are just showing their faces more thru social media. there is going to be and already is a push to associate the MAGA hat with racism & white nationalism. soon all republicans//conservatives will be viewed thru this sense. isn't this scary to some? we are letting opposition parties define the meanings of those they oppose & that is inherently a flawed bias.
Reply
#54
engage me constructively, i am genuinely concerned what's happening in this country plus how the media is simplifying these situations into memes & quick bits that everyone on social media latches onto. if you do not share that exact opinion getting shared, you are deemed wrong
Reply
#55
the thing about lincoln is he's kinda lionized after the fact, he said very specifically that he did not advocate for any form of racial equality, his ending slavery was a great thing but i think his intentions (financial and political, not humanitarian) can be analyzed and criticized still
[Image: NSiuXpT.jpg]
Reply
#56
@shagg i think it's reasonable for people who were closeted white supremacists being open white supremacists now being called a rise of white nationalism, their openness allows them to organize in larger numbers and larger numbers being relative safety. and i think part of it is attributable to trump, as ive said multiple times in this post not taking a stance against white supremacy is implicitly supporting it, and going as far as to hire steve bannon in the first place is imo explicitly supporting it.

statues and monuments will always be portrayed as a positive thing, that's the nature of them. i don't think they need to be kept even in museums or galleries. i DO think that history books and public education needs a serious overhaul with how it handles the atrocities of american history, it needs to portray them as atrocities and not just products of their time, and then we have no need to preserve it in the form of monuments to terrible men whose names, for the most part, do need to be lost to history.

i do agree that painting ALL republicans as white supremacists is nonsense. i think that it devalues the danger of white supremacists and makes it harder to identify actual dangerous people as opposed to well meaning ignorant people that can be persuaded but also people have a right to be wary of any and all trump supporters, i definitely am.
[Image: NSiuXpT.jpg]
Reply
#57
From my perspective ™ Trump is not a factor in the rise of white nationalism but is partly a symptom - not to say that WN brought him to power, but to say that WN supported Trump for some reason. Now this overt torch-bearing, flag waving cult-like thuggery of the KKK and nazis may not itself be "on the rise", but the question is: was it ever a widespread thing? I mean, the huge crowds you see in nazi photos were largely composed by people whom I have a hard time believing to be supporters of genocide. They were there to watch the parades, and to celebrate Germany the same way large crowds show up to celebrate Obama or the Pope. It was the brutally efficient propaganda machine of the nazi regime that brought it all under the symbolism.

I don't believe that nazi Germany was composed of millions of the same chinless inbreds that paraded the streets in Charlottesville. But those chinless inbreds are crucial tools in a) setting fear and b) normalizing violent discourse. As for a), the results are clear: by having those muscle-brained baboons march the streets, immediatly the antileft rethoric of "oh the other side was antifa aka communists aka stalin" immediatly set in. This is important because even though there is widespread condemnation of the fact that Trump didn't repudiate the nazis from the get-go, I can't say the same is true for his statements of "blame on both sides". I would bet some money that most people actually agree with Trump on that one.

And this is partly what I mean when I say that I feel like this is an orchestrated effort. By having the mindless thugs out there, the "peaceful", reasonable-minded rght-wing can emerge out of the woodwork and speak at ease. And the problem here is that the USA's brand of "right-wing", in europe, is actually the far-right. Just to be clear, Theresa May is more or less a kind of a Hillary Clinton in the UK. While Trump, who most people agree to be right-wing, but not far-right, makes speeches worthy of a Marine Le Pen - who in french standards is bordering on fascist (I would argue she is a de facto fascist).

So in truth I disagree that this isn't a growing movement. I made a point about youtube pundits because those guys, holy shit, right at this moment you have middle-aged, middle-class white men making money hand over fist from commentating on the happenings in the feminist, antiracist or other leftist fronts. And guess what, they tear it down - with half-baked, often ignorant, sometimes flatout made-up arguments. These people have been organizing, they are structured, and they are relentless. Also, they have the support of a certain political influence on the right. These are the people calling for the freedom of speech of nazis - even in this case, you will see them make the points of "well yeah the death is wrong and I'm definitely not a nazi you guys, but nazis should have a right to organize regardless; not the antifa though, the antifa are terrorists!" They fan the extremist flames because the chinless morons will tke the fall for these people, who thrive.
[Image: 4761558c1f.png]
[-] The following 1 user Likes grue Moderator's post:
  • narcissa
Reply
#58
which again, I pin it all down on a greater state of the art that we're living where political influence is ideologically vacant at the higher echelon, ridden with empty-minded pundits on the middle, and millitarized on the bottom. the "left" has those too, and the ccensorship rallies in universities are an example of that, though I can hardly feel sorry for Ben Shapiro, a man who takes pride in telling children that their parents deserve to be poor
[Image: 4761558c1f.png]
Reply
#59
(08-24-2017, 05:03 AM)fat lesbian Wrote: the thing about lincoln is he's kinda lionized after the fact, he said very specifically that he did not advocate for any form of racial equality, his ending slavery was a great thing but i think his intentions (financial and political, not humanitarian) can be analyzed and criticized still

Every president has done something incredibly stupid that should be analyzed and criticized
Reply
#60
(08-24-2017, 05:14 AM)grue Wrote: From my perspective ™ Trump is not a factor in the rise of white nationalism but is partly a symptom - not to say that WN brought him to power, but to say that WN supported Trump for some reason. Now this overt torch-bearing, flag waving cult-like thuggery of the KKK and nazis may not itself be "on the rise", but the question is: was it ever a widespread thing? I mean, the huge crowds you see in nazi photos were largely composed by people whom I have a hard time believing to be supporters of genocide. They were there to watch the parades, and to celebrate Germany the same way large crowds show up to celebrate Obama or the Pope. It was the brutally efficient propaganda machine of the nazi regime that brought it all under the symbolism.

I don't believe that nazi Germany was composed of millions of the same chinless inbreds that paraded the streets in Charlottesville. But those chinless inbreds are crucial tools in a) setting fear and b) normalizing violent discourse. As for a), the results are clear: by having those muscle-brained baboons march the streets, immediatly the antileft rethoric of "oh the other side was antifa aka communists aka stalin" immediatly set in. This is important because even though there is widespread condemnation of the fact that Trump didn't repudiate the nazis from the get-go, I can't say the same is true for his statements of "blame on both sides". I would bet some money that most people actually agree with Trump on that one.

And this is partly what I mean when I say that I feel like this is an orchestrated effort. By having the mindless thugs out there, the "peaceful", reasonable-minded rght-wing can emerge out of the woodwork and speak at ease. And the problem here is that the USA's brand of "right-wing", in europe, is actually the far-right. Just to be clear, Theresa May is more or less a kind of a Hillary Clinton in the UK. While Trump, who most people agree to be right-wing, but not far-right, makes speeches worthy of a Marine Le Pen - who in french standards is bordering on fascist (I would argue she is a de facto fascist).

So in truth I disagree that this isn't a growing movement. I made a point about youtube pundits because those guys, holy shit, right at this moment you have middle-aged, middle-class white men making money hand over fist from commentating on the happenings in the feminist, antiracist or other leftist fronts. And guess what, they tear it down - with half-baked, often ignorant, sometimes flatout made-up arguments. These people have been organizing, they are structured, and they are relentless. Also, they have the support of a certain political influence on the right. These are the people calling for the freedom of speech of nazis - even in this case, you will see them make the points of "well yeah the death is wrong and I'm definitely not a nazi you guys, but nazis should have a right to organize regardless; not the antifa though, the antifa are terrorists!" They fan the extremist flames because the chinless morons will tke the fall for these people, who thrive.

it has always been fairly widespread but latent re: neo nazis, the KKK is widespread to the point of being historically VERY influential in American politics and cultural attitudes. they were forced underground for some time but they are being emboldened and moving back to the forefront at a really alarming speed 

and yeah most people agree with the liberal centrist "both sides" line which is a problem, and white supremacists will capitalize on that. we cannot afford to portray them as stupid uneducated rural people, they are not. they are college educated men with jobs in finance, politics, and in positions of influence. they are not dumb and they know exactly what they're doing and how to do it and a major failing of their opposition is that we lack the organizational skills and political power that they possess. 

you are absolutely right in how they're organizing. they want to portray themselves as reasonable people who just want a future for white children and all that 14 words shit. they are very aware that centrist liberals are most likely to side with who they consider nonviolent or nonoffensive, which is why they condemned milo for pedophilia despite many being pedophiles themselves, the nazi car man despite being violent nazis themselves, they NEED to keep certain things behind closed doors on they can further their position that the left is overreacting.
[Image: NSiuXpT.jpg]
Reply


Forum Jump: