Unpatriotic Dems In Virginia Erases Confederate Holiday

[Superbadbrutha]

--- Which they were, and not by the communities but by (primarily) the UDC who were on a massive propaganda campaign, a larger part of which involved screening and rewriting American history books in the South, as noted earlier. These communities neither erected these monuments nor did they ask for them; they were DONATED by the UDC after THEY commissioned and purchased them.
.....

Just like the written records of the bases of secession of the various Confederate states that specifically refer to the continuation of Slavery as their reasoning, this rhetoric leaves little doubt as to what the intention was.

Hundreds of memorials over generations of time, spread over populations in the tens of millions?


You finding a few racists quotes does not prove anything.


And why do you keep using the abbreviation, UDC, instead of saying who they actually were? The United Daughters of the Confederacy.



For over 5 generations, America as a whole has accepted the South's celebration of it's heritage and culture as part of the larger American culture and heritage.


That you libs have decided at this late date, that suddenly Southern Whites are not allowed to be proud of their heritage and culture, is you being divisive.


Why do you want to tear this nation apart?

Most folks who disagreed with these racist traitors being honored didn't have a voice until now.

You are FAR more racist than Robert E. Lee, who never owned a slave in his life, was. Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson said "Slavery is an abomination in the eyes of almighty God."

Because you are stupid, a racist, and an ignorant bigot, you seek to erase history - not just through the DNC Taliban destroying artwork, but also the facts of history.

Lee took up arms against the United States of America you ignorant fool. Stop reading His-Story and learn some real damn history for a change.

Lee personally owned slaves that he inherited upon the death of his mother, Ann Lee, in 1829. (His son, Robert E. Lee Jr., gave the number as three or four families.) Following the death of his father-in-law, George Washington Parke Custis, in 1857, Lee assumed command...

Myths & Misunderstandings | Lee as a slaveholder ...
acwm.org/blog/myths-misunderstandings-lee-slaveholder

Lee got rid of the slaves and lost the war. YOu are still in full traitor and racist mode, so, uncensored's point could still be pretty much on.

Did Lee own slaves?

Did Lee take up arms against the United States of America?

 

[Correll]

Hundreds of memorials over generations of time, spread over populations in the tens of millions?


You finding a few racists quotes does not prove anything.


And why do you keep using the abbreviation, UDC, instead of saying who they actually were? The United Daughters of the Confederacy.



For over 5 generations, America as a whole has accepted the South's celebration of it's heritage and culture as part of the larger American culture and heritage.


That you libs have decided at this late date, that suddenly Southern Whites are not allowed to be proud of their heritage and culture, is you being divisive.


Why do you want to tear this nation apart?

Most folks who disagreed with these racist traitors being honored didn't have a voice until now.

You are FAR more racist than Robert E. Lee, who never owned a slave in his life, was. Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson said "Slavery is an abomination in the eyes of almighty God."

Because you are stupid, a racist, and an ignorant bigot, you seek to erase history - not just through the DNC Taliban destroying artwork, but also the facts of history.

Lee took up arms against the United States of America you ignorant fool. Stop reading His-Story and learn some real damn history for a change.

Lee personally owned slaves that he inherited upon the death of his mother, Ann Lee, in 1829. (His son, Robert E. Lee Jr., gave the number as three or four families.) Following the death of his father-in-law, George Washington Parke Custis, in 1857, Lee assumed command...

Myths & Misunderstandings | Lee as a slaveholder ...
acwm.org/blog/myths-misunderstandings-lee-slaveholder

Lee got rid of the slaves and lost the war. YOu are still in full traitor and racist mode, so, uncensored's point could still be pretty much on.

Did Lee own slaves?

Did Lee take up arms against the United States of America?

Yeah, you said that. And then I pointed out how he changed in life, while you are currently working to tear this nation apart.


So, like I said, uncensored point is likely on. As you know, or you would have directly challenged it.

 

[Superbadbrutha]

Because it's HIS OWN IMAGE, that's why.

WHO OWNS one's own image?

You haven't told us why after-the-fact propagandists should prevail over somebody else's image in conflict with that person's wishes. Sounds kinda like ----------- owning a person. So you're actually suggesting that some wanker who wants to use your image for propaganda, should have dominion over your image that you specifically denied them before you died.

But people don't own their own image. People take pictures of politicians and celebrities and keep them, and post them and use them without permission.

If they use that image to misrepresent that figure, then it's dishonest. And no one has the right to be dishonest.

Do you agree that Lee's work at reconciliation after the war, gave him some level of Moral Authority?

No. I agree that it was simply the right thing to do. And we should hasten to add, his plea to not put statues up was part of that work at reconciliation. It's an honorable goal. Honorable goals should not be disrespected.

I'm not sure there is such a thing as "moral authority" unless it refers to an accepted precept such as ... honoring the wishes of the dead. I don't think people can "own" moral authority. It simply IS.

1. Misrepresent? Who or what is doing that?

2. So, you cite Lee as an Authority to defer to, but can't explain why. That is disappointing. I can only conclude that you cited him, because he agreed with you. Me? I consider him an important historical figure and a great American historical figure.

Both of these have been answered, repeatedly.

1- the LCC (Lost Cause Cult)

2 - Explained above -- To the extent he's an "authority to defer to" it's his image and his request. Some third party cannot overrule one's own request of one's own image. That just isn't valid. Sure they can go ahead and put that statue up anyway, but they cannot do so without countermanding those wishes, and that remains. Forever.

1. Southern Pride and Heritage is not Lost Cause. Your claim otherwise is you misrepresenting tens of millions of good southern people, indeed, scores of millions of good Americans who support Historical Statues.

You mean those good God Fearin, Christian Southerners who enslaved other human beings and then denied them basic human rights for another 100yrs. You are talking about those Good Southerners.

2. But he does not own his image. He was a public figure and he is an historical figure of great importance. It is completely reasonable that he would be included in any movement to memorialize the service of the Confederates. I thought I might be getting though to you, but you wiggled away

You're right he is a historic figure, a man that will be forever known as a traitor.

 

[rightwinger]

Hundreds of memorials over generations of time, spread over populations in the tens of millions?


You finding a few racists quotes does not prove anything.


And why do you keep using the abbreviation, UDC, instead of saying who they actually were? The United Daughters of the Confederacy.



For over 5 generations, America as a whole has accepted the South's celebration of it's heritage and culture as part of the larger American culture and heritage.


That you libs have decided at this late date, that suddenly Southern Whites are not allowed to be proud of their heritage and culture, is you being divisive.


Why do you want to tear this nation apart?

Most folks who disagreed with these racist traitors being honored didn't have a voice until now.

You are FAR more racist than Robert E. Lee, who never owned a slave in his life, was. Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson said "Slavery is an abomination in the eyes of almighty God."

Because you are stupid, a racist, and an ignorant bigot, you seek to erase history - not just through the DNC Taliban destroying artwork, but also the facts of history.

Lee took up arms against the United States of America you ignorant fool. Stop reading His-Story and learn some real damn history for a change.

Lee personally owned slaves that he inherited upon the death of his mother, Ann Lee, in 1829. (His son, Robert E. Lee Jr., gave the number as three or four families.) Following the death of his father-in-law, George Washington Parke Custis, in 1857, Lee assumed command...

Myths & Misunderstandings | Lee as a slaveholder ...
acwm.org/blog/myths-misunderstandings-lee-slaveholder

Lee was a nasty slaveholder

He was an icon of reconciliation and unity.

He didn’t have any choice

He was lucky he wasn’t thrown in jail with Jeff Davis

 

[rightwinger]

If they use that image to misrepresent that figure, then it's dishonest. And no one has the right to be dishonest.


No. I agree that it was simply the right thing to do. And we should hasten to add, his plea to not put statues up was part of that work at reconciliation. It's an honorable goal. Honorable goals should not be disrespected.

I'm not sure there is such a thing as "moral authority" unless it refers to an accepted precept such as ... honoring the wishes of the dead. I don't think people can "own" moral authority. It simply IS.

1. Misrepresent? Who or what is doing that?

2. So, you cite Lee as an Authority to defer to, but can't explain why. That is disappointing. I can only conclude that you cited him, because he agreed with you. Me? I consider him an important historical figure and a great American historical figure.

Both of these have been answered, repeatedly.

1- the LCC (Lost Cause Cult)

2 - Explained above -- To the extent he's an "authority to defer to" it's his image and his request. Some third party cannot overrule one's own request of one's own image. That just isn't valid. Sure they can go ahead and put that statue up anyway, but they cannot do so without countermanding those wishes, and that remains. Forever.

1. Southern Pride and Heritage is not Lost Cause. Your claim otherwise is you misrepresenting tens of millions of good southern people, indeed, scores of millions of good Americans who support Historical Statues.

Correct, they are not the same thing. Therefore do not conflate them.

"Southern pride and heritage" is a cultural entity, a living breathing one. It lives in families, language, foods, music, customs and all the various manifestations of culture. For me it lives in my cousins, deceased parents aunts and uncles, places they took us, the food they fed us, the Stars and Bars I inherited from my mother, songs we played together, the very house I live in, and by the way it's absolutely subdivided into distinct and diverse regional cultures. The Cult of the Lost Cause on the other hand is a deceitful dishonest propaganda campaign designed to whitewash history.

2. But he does not own his image. He was a public figure and he is an historical figure of great importance. It is completely reasonable that he would be included in any movement to memorialize the service of the Confederates. I thought I might be getting though to you, but you wiggled away

So ---- "the state", or "the campaign" owns people now? Does said state or campaign get to determine how you will dress, wear your hair or beard and where you will live in life? It must, if it gets to edit your wishes to the opposite of what they were in death once you're out of the way to object.

It's an incontrovertible FACT that Robert E. Lee specifically opined that such statues NOT be erected. That means, because "one equals one", that those who do erect Lee statues are specifically disrespecting him while claiming by their action to do the opposite. At the very least, purporting themselves to be better judges of what Reconciliation than Lee himself, the very object they supposedly seek to glorify.

But they're not glorifying Lee, are they. They're glorifying their own historical bullshit. Lee put them in that position, and they went ahead and did it anyway, in the example posted yesterday in New Orleans, with his arms folded facing North in defiant confrontational posture, stark contrast to Lee's actual wish for reconciliation (that you yourself correctly cited). There's only one reason to do that, and it's outright lying about history. It's selling propaganda on the back of a dead man who's not around to object any more.

Long story short --- that statue wasn't removed because it was Lee. It was removed because it's a Lie.

1. You are the one conflating the Lost Cause movement with tens of millions of good southern people who, while not Lost Causers, are proud of their heritage and culture. YOu, not me.


2. They are focusing on certain aspects of the Confederacy, such as the bravery and skill and service of the Confederate fighting men. This is not lying. We all pick and choose what to celebrate in our history and culture. ALL cultures do this. Indeed, it is part of progress.

Southern people who conspired to enforce Jim Crow second class citizenship after they no longer could have slaves

 

[Correll]

But people don't own their own image. People take pictures of politicians and celebrities and keep them, and post them and use them without permission.

If they use that image to misrepresent that figure, then it's dishonest. And no one has the right to be dishonest.

Do you agree that Lee's work at reconciliation after the war, gave him some level of Moral Authority?

No. I agree that it was simply the right thing to do. And we should hasten to add, his plea to not put statues up was part of that work at reconciliation. It's an honorable goal. Honorable goals should not be disrespected.

I'm not sure there is such a thing as "moral authority" unless it refers to an accepted precept such as ... honoring the wishes of the dead. I don't think people can "own" moral authority. It simply IS.

1. Misrepresent? Who or what is doing that?

2. So, you cite Lee as an Authority to defer to, but can't explain why. That is disappointing. I can only conclude that you cited him, because he agreed with you. Me? I consider him an important historical figure and a great American historical figure.

Both of these have been answered, repeatedly.

1- the LCC (Lost Cause Cult)

2 - Explained above -- To the extent he's an "authority to defer to" it's his image and his request. Some third party cannot overrule one's own request of one's own image. That just isn't valid. Sure they can go ahead and put that statue up anyway, but they cannot do so without countermanding those wishes, and that remains. Forever.

1. Southern Pride and Heritage is not Lost Cause. Your claim otherwise is you misrepresenting tens of millions of good southern people, indeed, scores of millions of good Americans who support Historical Statues.

You mean those good God Fearin, Christian Southerners who enslaved other human beings and then denied them basic human rights for another 100yrs. You are talking about those Good Southerners.

2. But he does not own his image. He was a public figure and he is an historical figure of great importance. It is completely reasonable that he would be included in any movement to memorialize the service of the Confederates. I thought I might be getting though to you, but you wiggled away

You're right he is a historic figure, a man that will be forever known as a traitor.

1. No, I was clearly talking about modern Southerns, who are good people, and want to be abe to celebrate their history and culture like everyone else. It is telling that you have to work so hard to avoid what I am actually saying, to even pretend to defend your position.


2. He and all the Confederates were forgiven and pardoned long ago, by the very people that actually fought and defeated them. Your pretense of caring about that, is not credible. This is about your hatred and bigotry against modern Southern whites, and you know it.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Lee lost, and surrendered and then became post war, a symbol of reconciliation between the North and South.

I agree with that. As I already noted repeatedly, Lee did *NOT* approve of statues and monuments. As I've said in the past, those who use Robert E. Lee for their own self-serving purposes by putting propaganda in the mouth of a deceased man who can't speak for himself, DIShonor his wishes by doing that, and those statues should be accompanied by a plaque reading "General Lee specifically told us not to do this, but fuck him, we've got propaganda to sell".

I like the way you are citing General Lee as a moral Authority on this matter. Would you say that his views should be respected because of his Moral Authority as a former rebellion leader who embraced unity and reconciliation, or is it something else?

It's very simple. I would say, as I already did say, that those were his wishes expressed while he was alive. Had those wishes been honored and statues not erected, that fact would be obscure trivia. But in the event the propagandists had to do what he specifically asked them NOT to do. Which (again) speaks volumes about whose agenda means more to said propagandists --- their purported hero, or their own.

Because that's how propaganda works; the objective is never honest.

But, why should his words have any weight? Because of the strength of his arguments? Because of the Moral Authority he had as a former general?


What is your motivation in listening to him? Is it just because he agrees with you? I hope you have more than that.

Because it's HIS OWN IMAGE, that's why.

WHO OWNS one's own image?

You haven't told us why after-the-fact propagandists should prevail over somebody else's image in conflict with that person's wishes. Sounds kinda like ----------- owning a person.

So you're actually suggesting that some wanker who wants to use your image for propaganda, should have dominion over your image that you specifically denied them before you died.

That pile of shit child molester Muhammad never wanted his image captured either. But death makes stopping people a little difficult.

I don't actually believe in an afterlife, but I am comforted by the idea that Muhammad is in a lake of fire being butt fucked with a pineapple for all eternity....

 

[Uncensored2008]

1. Misrepresent? Who or what is doing that?

2. So, you cite Lee as an Authority to defer to, but can't explain why. That is disappointing. I can only conclude that you cited him, because he agreed with you. Me? I consider him an important historical figure and a great American historical figure.

Both of these have been answered, repeatedly.

1- the LCC (Lost Cause Cult)

2 - Explained above -- To the extent he's an "authority to defer to" it's his image and his request. Some third party cannot overrule one's own request of one's own image. That just isn't valid. Sure they can go ahead and put that statue up anyway, but they cannot do so without countermanding those wishes, and that remains. Forever.

1. Southern Pride and Heritage is not Lost Cause. Your claim otherwise is you misrepresenting tens of millions of good southern people, indeed, scores of millions of good Americans who support Historical Statues.

Correct, they are not the same thing. Therefore do not conflate them.

"Southern pride and heritage" is a cultural entity, a living breathing one. It lives in families, language, foods, music, customs and all the various manifestations of culture. For me it lives in my cousins, deceased parents aunts and uncles, places they took us, the food they fed us, the Stars and Bars I inherited from my mother, songs we played together, the very house I live in, and by the way it's absolutely subdivided into distinct and diverse regional cultures. The Cult of the Lost Cause on the other hand is a deceitful dishonest propaganda campaign designed to whitewash history.

2. But he does not own his image. He was a public figure and he is an historical figure of great importance. It is completely reasonable that he would be included in any movement to memorialize the service of the Confederates. I thought I might be getting though to you, but you wiggled away

So ---- "the state", or "the campaign" owns people now? Does said state or campaign get to determine how you will dress, wear your hair or beard and where you will live in life? It must, if it gets to edit your wishes to the opposite of what they were in death once you're out of the way to object.

It's an incontrovertible FACT that Robert E. Lee specifically opined that such statues NOT be erected. That means, because "one equals one", that those who do erect Lee statues are specifically disrespecting him while claiming by their action to do the opposite. At the very least, purporting themselves to be better judges of what Reconciliation than Lee himself, the very object they supposedly seek to glorify.

But they're not glorifying Lee, are they. They're glorifying their own historical bullshit. Lee put them in that position, and they went ahead and did it anyway, in the example posted yesterday in New Orleans, with his arms folded facing North in defiant confrontational posture, stark contrast to Lee's actual wish for reconciliation (that you yourself correctly cited). There's only one reason to do that, and it's outright lying about history. It's selling propaganda on the back of a dead man who's not around to object any more.

Long story short --- that statue wasn't removed because it was Lee. It was removed because it's a Lie.

1. You are the one conflating the Lost Cause movement with tens of millions of good southern people who, while not Lost Causers, are proud of their heritage and culture. YOu, not me.


2. They are focusing on certain aspects of the Confederacy, such as the bravery and skill and service of the Confederate fighting men. This is not lying. We all pick and choose what to celebrate in our history and culture. ALL cultures do this. Indeed, it is part of progress.

Southern people who conspired to enforce Jim Crow second class citizenship after they no longer could have slaves

Oh, democrats?

Yeah, democrats are real scum. Always were, always will be. They're doing the Jim Crow shit again, but this time against white people. Fucking vermin....

 

[Pogo]

Most folks who disagreed with these racist traitors being honored didn't have a voice until now.

You are FAR more racist than Robert E. Lee, who never owned a slave in his life, was. Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson said "Slavery is an abomination in the eyes of almighty God."

Because you are stupid, a racist, and an ignorant bigot, you seek to erase history - not just through the DNC Taliban destroying artwork, but also the facts of history.

Lee took up arms against the United States of America you ignorant fool. Stop reading His-Story and learn some real damn history for a change.

Lee personally owned slaves that he inherited upon the death of his mother, Ann Lee, in 1829. (His son, Robert E. Lee Jr., gave the number as three or four families.) Following the death of his father-in-law, George Washington Parke Custis, in 1857, Lee assumed command...

Myths & Misunderstandings | Lee as a slaveholder ...
acwm.org/blog/myths-misunderstandings-lee-slaveholder

Lee got rid of the slaves and lost the war. YOu are still in full traitor and racist mode, so, uncensored's point could still be pretty much on.

Did Lee own slaves?

Did Lee take up arms against the United States of America?

Yeah, you said that. And then I pointed out how he changed in life, while you are currently working to tear this nation apart.

So, like I said, uncensored point is likely on. As you know, or you would have directly challenged it.

Actually what Pothead ("Uncensored") said was that Lee, quote, "never owned a slave in his life".

He was wrong about that, and Brutha did directly challenge it.

 

[Correll]

Most folks who disagreed with these racist traitors being honored didn't have a voice until now.

You are FAR more racist than Robert E. Lee, who never owned a slave in his life, was. Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson said "Slavery is an abomination in the eyes of almighty God."

Because you are stupid, a racist, and an ignorant bigot, you seek to erase history - not just through the DNC Taliban destroying artwork, but also the facts of history.

Lee took up arms against the United States of America you ignorant fool. Stop reading His-Story and learn some real damn history for a change.

Lee personally owned slaves that he inherited upon the death of his mother, Ann Lee, in 1829. (His son, Robert E. Lee Jr., gave the number as three or four families.) Following the death of his father-in-law, George Washington Parke Custis, in 1857, Lee assumed command...

Myths & Misunderstandings | Lee as a slaveholder ...
acwm.org/blog/myths-misunderstandings-lee-slaveholder

Lee was a nasty slaveholder

He was an icon of reconciliation and unity.

He didn’t have any choice

He was lucky he wasn’t thrown in jail with Jeff Davis

He lost, surrendered and became a icon of reconciliation and unity. Our ancestors, the ones that actually fought and defeated the South, accepted that and supported it.

And that set the tone and policy of the nation as a whole for the next 5 generations.


What moral authority do you have, that is greater than that of the men that fought and defeated the Confederacy, and freed the slaves?

 

[Uncensored2008]

They should remove monuments of a traitor.

Okay, so remove all monuments to Obama.

Then what?

It's an attack on our history that must be preserved for future generations warts and all.

Here we are in a civil war again. What was that about those who fail to learn from history?

The Antebellum South was a horrible society. Feudalism where a tiny monied elite had absolute control of state governments and preyed on the populace at large. Georgia with the small holder act that allowed large plantations to literally steal land from small farmers. Poor whites fared worse than black slaves. I have nothing good to say about the south. BUT erasing history is what the Taliban and other tyrants do.

Poor whites fared worse than black slaves, Smfh. That has to be one of the stupidest statements ever made on this message board.

It’s all part of Lost Cause Revisionist history

Did you know that Whites were slaves too?
That makes four million black slaves OK

Nope, but it makes black victimhood less meaningful. 150 years ago blacks were treated like shit by democrats. Now everyone is treated like shit by democrats.

 

[rightwinger]

Both of these have been answered, repeatedly.

1- the LCC (Lost Cause Cult)

2 - Explained above -- To the extent he's an "authority to defer to" it's his image and his request. Some third party cannot overrule one's own request of one's own image. That just isn't valid. Sure they can go ahead and put that statue up anyway, but they cannot do so without countermanding those wishes, and that remains. Forever.

1. Southern Pride and Heritage is not Lost Cause. Your claim otherwise is you misrepresenting tens of millions of good southern people, indeed, scores of millions of good Americans who support Historical Statues.

Correct, they are not the same thing. Therefore do not conflate them.

"Southern pride and heritage" is a cultural entity, a living breathing one. It lives in families, language, foods, music, customs and all the various manifestations of culture. For me it lives in my cousins, deceased parents aunts and uncles, places they took us, the food they fed us, the Stars and Bars I inherited from my mother, songs we played together, the very house I live in, and by the way it's absolutely subdivided into distinct and diverse regional cultures. The Cult of the Lost Cause on the other hand is a deceitful dishonest propaganda campaign designed to whitewash history.

2. But he does not own his image. He was a public figure and he is an historical figure of great importance. It is completely reasonable that he would be included in any movement to memorialize the service of the Confederates. I thought I might be getting though to you, but you wiggled away

So ---- "the state", or "the campaign" owns people now? Does said state or campaign get to determine how you will dress, wear your hair or beard and where you will live in life? It must, if it gets to edit your wishes to the opposite of what they were in death once you're out of the way to object.

It's an incontrovertible FACT that Robert E. Lee specifically opined that such statues NOT be erected. That means, because "one equals one", that those who do erect Lee statues are specifically disrespecting him while claiming by their action to do the opposite. At the very least, purporting themselves to be better judges of what Reconciliation than Lee himself, the very object they supposedly seek to glorify.

But they're not glorifying Lee, are they. They're glorifying their own historical bullshit. Lee put them in that position, and they went ahead and did it anyway, in the example posted yesterday in New Orleans, with his arms folded facing North in defiant confrontational posture, stark contrast to Lee's actual wish for reconciliation (that you yourself correctly cited). There's only one reason to do that, and it's outright lying about history. It's selling propaganda on the back of a dead man who's not around to object any more.

Long story short --- that statue wasn't removed because it was Lee. It was removed because it's a Lie.

1. You are the one conflating the Lost Cause movement with tens of millions of good southern people who, while not Lost Causers, are proud of their heritage and culture. YOu, not me.


2. They are focusing on certain aspects of the Confederacy, such as the bravery and skill and service of the Confederate fighting men. This is not lying. We all pick and choose what to celebrate in our history and culture. ALL cultures do this. Indeed, it is part of progress.

Southern people who conspired to enforce Jim Crow second class citizenship after they no longer could have slaves

Oh, democrats?

Yeah, democrats are real scum. Always were, always will be. They're doing the Jim Crow shit again, but this time against white people. Fucking vermin....

Southerners

Southerners owned slaves for 200 years before the Democratic Party was formed

 

[Pogo]

I agree with that. As I already noted repeatedly, Lee did *NOT* approve of statues and monuments. As I've said in the past, those who use Robert E. Lee for their own self-serving purposes by putting propaganda in the mouth of a deceased man who can't speak for himself, DIShonor his wishes by doing that, and those statues should be accompanied by a plaque reading "General Lee specifically told us not to do this, but fuck him, we've got propaganda to sell".

I like the way you are citing General Lee as a moral Authority on this matter. Would you say that his views should be respected because of his Moral Authority as a former rebellion leader who embraced unity and reconciliation, or is it something else?

It's very simple. I would say, as I already did say, that those were his wishes expressed while he was alive. Had those wishes been honored and statues not erected, that fact would be obscure trivia. But in the event the propagandists had to do what he specifically asked them NOT to do. Which (again) speaks volumes about whose agenda means more to said propagandists --- their purported hero, or their own.

Because that's how propaganda works; the objective is never honest.

But, why should his words have any weight? Because of the strength of his arguments? Because of the Moral Authority he had as a former general?


What is your motivation in listening to him? Is it just because he agrees with you? I hope you have more than that.

Because it's HIS OWN IMAGE, that's why.

WHO OWNS one's own image?

You haven't told us why after-the-fact propagandists should prevail over somebody else's image in conflict with that person's wishes. Sounds kinda like ----------- owning a person.

So you're actually suggesting that some wanker who wants to use your image for propaganda, should have dominion over your image that you specifically denied them before you died.

That pile of shit child molester Muhammad never wanted his image captured either. But death makes stopping people a little difficult.

I don't actually believe in an afterlife, but I am comforted by the idea that Muhammad is in a lake of fire being butt fucked with a pineapple for all eternity....

Pothead, I'm not sure who else but you could come up with a post saying "I don't believe in an afterlife but here's what I think is going on in the afterlife".

With pineapples no less, which are well known for growing all over Arabia in the seventh century They were like weeds.

 

[rightwinger]

You are FAR more racist than Robert E. Lee, who never owned a slave in his life, was. Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson said "Slavery is an abomination in the eyes of almighty God."

Because you are stupid, a racist, and an ignorant bigot, you seek to erase history - not just through the DNC Taliban destroying artwork, but also the facts of history.

Lee took up arms against the United States of America you ignorant fool. Stop reading His-Story and learn some real damn history for a change.

Lee personally owned slaves that he inherited upon the death of his mother, Ann Lee, in 1829. (His son, Robert E. Lee Jr., gave the number as three or four families.) Following the death of his father-in-law, George Washington Parke Custis, in 1857, Lee assumed command...

Myths & Misunderstandings | Lee as a slaveholder ...
acwm.org/blog/myths-misunderstandings-lee-slaveholder

Lee was a nasty slaveholder

He was an icon of reconciliation and unity.

He didn’t have any choice

He was lucky he wasn’t thrown in jail with Jeff Davis

He lost, surrendered and became a icon of reconciliation and unity. Our ancestors, the ones that actually fought and defeated the South, accepted that and supported it.

And that set the tone and policy of the nation as a whole for the next 5 generations.


What moral authority do you have, that is greater than that of the men that fought and defeated the Confederacy, and freed the slaves?

Easy for someone who lost to suck up to avoid prison

Did Lee ever apologize?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Absolutely whites were slaves. But we got over it.

Because you weren't slaves in this country. Duh. Damn people are stupid...

Goddamn but your stupid.

The Forgotten History of Britain's White Slaves in America

You illiterate dumbfuck.

 

[Pogo]

Okay, so remove all monuments to Obama.

Then what?

It's an attack on our history that must be preserved for future generations warts and all.

Here we are in a civil war again. What was that about those who fail to learn from history?

The Antebellum South was a horrible society. Feudalism where a tiny monied elite had absolute control of state governments and preyed on the populace at large. Georgia with the small holder act that allowed large plantations to literally steal land from small farmers. Poor whites fared worse than black slaves. I have nothing good to say about the south. BUT erasing history is what the Taliban and other tyrants do.

Poor whites fared worse than black slaves, Smfh. That has to be one of the stupidest statements ever made on this message board.

It’s all part of Lost Cause Revisionist history

Did you know that Whites were slaves too?
That makes four million black slaves OK

Nope, but it makes black victimhood less meaningful. 150 years ago blacks were treated like shit by democrats. Now everyone is treated like shit by democrats.

Isn't that what democratic means?

(That will sail right over his hood.)

 

[Scamp]

How do the haters, who want to erase Confederate history, feel about the fact that the same Union army immediately after the Civil War, waged another war to exterminate the Indians? Should we erase that history also?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

who want to erase Confederate history,

Nobody wants to "erase history". Where are you getting this whiny nonsense?

 

[froggy]

and ye the people let them get away with destroying American history

 

[Uncensored2008]

Southerners

Southerners owned slaves for 200 years before the Democratic Party was formed

Yep, democrats.

The Antebellum South was like California today, 100% democrat controlled. The methods and goals really haven't changed in all that time. Scumbag Newsom is making the whole state into a plantation under the Silicone Valley Oligarchs.