Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 67

Thread: Sad News From Richmond, Virginia

  1. #51
    Quote Originally Posted by TRaider View Post
    Are you really comparing the Nazis to the Confederates?
    Both CSA and Nazi Germany started racial wars: CSA for the right to enslave black people, Germany for the right to basically enslave slavic people (soviet people if you will). But considering that Sox says a slave can be white and a slaver can be black, I'm guessing that, besides saying CSA were good fellas because we all humans have our duality, you probably think CSA rebelled against their country because they were opressed by their government so... yeah, probably this thread won't go anywhere.

  2. #52
    Quote Originally Posted by A. Bravo View Post
    Both CSA and Nazi Germany started racial wars: CSA for the right to enslave black people, Germany for the right to basically enslave slavic people (soviet people if you will). But considering that Sox says a slave can be white and a slaver can be black, I'm guessing that, besides saying CSA were good fellas because we all humans have our duality, you probably think CSA rebelled against their country because they were opressed by their government so... yeah, probably this thread won't go anywhere.
    You're entitled to your opinion sir I just disagree and that's ok.


  3. #53
    Lmatts and A.Bravo are you for removing Washington's monuments? If you're not I'd like to know why. Thank you!


  4. #54
    Of course it's going somewhere. Straight to locked.

    Quote Originally Posted by A. Bravo View Post
    CSA for the right to enslave black people
    Enslave is a verb. You're implying that there weren't already slaves in most states below the Mason-Dixon line. There were freemen in the South, but most migrated north. I believe a freeman was the first man killed in the siege of Atlanta. Not all areas of the South were plantation-heavy. That's part of the problem with such arguments: The 'slavery problem' is also all of America pre-January 1st, 1863 and certainly pre-1860. It's clear in studying the Civil War that few combatants from the North were abolitionists or motivated by abolition. In fact many were sickened by the idea of fighting for slaves. As with everything, their views on this evolved over time post-war.

    I have to laugh at the South Park-esque level of insanity which leads people to discuss this sort of stuff with vitriol 150 years later. But here we are because certain political ideologies in this country hate the fact that the South is the only thing stopping this country from 'progressing' into their version of utopia. Hence the need to sensationalize the Civil War, race, and about anything else. You wouldn't know these issues exist if you just talked to your neighbors. Much like pre-Civil War times we're divided by an exciting and flourishing new level of information access which we aren't used to as a society. Newspapers caused the Civil War though. Straight up.
    Last edited by Poorlaggedman; 06-11-2020 at 01:22 AM.
    Suggestion: Formations, Suppression, Spawning, Leadership https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZqPsbvyD8s


    Old Pennsylvania Discord: https://discord.gg/MjxfZ5n

  5. #55

    CSA Captain

    Sox's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    England
    Posts
    393
    Quote Originally Posted by A. Bravo View Post
    Both CSA and Nazi Germany started racial wars: CSA for the right to enslave black people, Germany for the right to basically enslave slavic people (soviet people if you will). But considering that Sox says a slave can be white and a slaver can be black, I'm guessing that, besides saying CSA were good fellas because we all humans have our duality, you probably think CSA rebelled against their country because they were opressed by their government so... yeah, probably this thread won't go anywhere.
    I said none of those things, but feel free to misquote me anytime you don't actually have an argument that's based in fact. The South already HAD the right to enslave coloured people when the war began, slavery was legal in many States, North & South. I'm also fully aware of the myriad reasons that the war began, and despite your sarcasm some southerners actually did go to war in the name of freedom, soldiers enlisted for MANY reasons. Slavery, States Rights, Expansion in the West, Nationalism, Lincoln's Election, Honour, etc etc etc. the first rumbles of secession were heard as early as 1798 for goodness sake. There is no doubt that the question of the expansion of slavery into new territories was a major factor in the south going to war, but it was not the only reason. The North most certainly did not go to war to put an end to slavery, no matter how many times a revisionist such as yourself says it was so.

    Oh, and Germany most certainly did not start World War Two ''for the right to basically enslave slavic people'', that's just ludicrous. The duality of man isn't something we made up for a forum discussion, that's also a fact.

    Quote Originally Posted by Poorlaggedman View Post
    Of course it's going somewhere. Straight to locked.

    Enslave is a verb. You're implying that there weren't already slaves in most states below the Mason-Dixon line. There were freemen in the South, but most migrated north. I believe a freeman was the first man killed in the siege of Atlanta. Not all areas of the South were plantation-heavy. That's part of the problem with such arguments: The 'slavery problem' is also all of America pre-January 1st, 1863 and certainly pre-1860. It's clear in studying the Civil War that few combatants from the North were abolitionists or motivated by abolition. In fact many were sickened by the idea of fighting for slaves. As with everything, their views on this evolved over time post-war.

    I have to laugh at the South Park-esque level of insanity which leads people to discuss this sort of stuff with vitriol 150 years later. But here we are because certain political ideologies in this country hate the fact that the South is the only thing stopping this country from 'progressing' into their version of utopia. Hence the need to sensationalize the Civil War, race, and about anything else. You wouldn't know these issues exist if you just talked to your neighbors. Much like pre-Civil War times we're divided by an exciting and flourishing new level of information access which we aren't used to as a society. Newspapers caused the Civil War though. Straight up.
    Says it far better than I ever could, and of course this thread will be locked, even though they allow verbal racial abuse to run riot on public servers. I'll end with this: As an idealistic fifteen year old I was a member of the Anti Nazi League in Britain, at a time when facist/racist groups like the National Front were gaining a lot of ground in my country. My Mother raised me to be blind to colour, and all my life I have been. By the start of the American Civil War in 1861 the United States was fully awake and alert to the evils of the institution of slavery & it would have ended with, or without, a war. In the end, the reasons that war was fought matter little to us now, no man, or woman, is guilty of the sins of their fathers, the sooner all the people of America realise that, then the better off everyone will be. Peace out.
    ''I'm here to play an American Civil War era combat game, not Call of Duty with muskets.''.

  6. #56
    Quote Originally Posted by Poorlaggedman View Post
    Of course it's going somewhere. Straight to locked.



    I have to laugh at the South Park-esque level of insanity which leads people to discuss this sort of stuff with vitriol 150 years later. But here we are because certain political ideologies in this country hate the fact that the South is the only thing stopping this country from 'progressing' into their version of utopia. Hence the need to sensationalize the Civil War, race, and about anything else. You wouldn't know these issues exist if you just talked to your neighbors. Much like pre-Civil War times we're divided by an exciting and flourishing new level of information access which we aren't used to as a society. Newspapers caused the Civil War though. Straight up.
    Both my neighbors know the "issues" exist, one being an African American family knows the "issues" existed for a long damn time. And yes, I too yearn for a "utopia' that doesn't glorify champions of slavery. I think that's a pretty patriotic thing to yearn for and obtainable.

  7. #57
    Quote Originally Posted by Grumpytoo View Post
    Both my neighbors know the "issues" exist, one being an African American family knows the "issues" existed for a long damn time. And yes, I too yearn for a "utopia' that doesn't glorify champions of slavery. I think that's a pretty patriotic thing to yearn for and obtainable.
    Grumpy your white guilt and virtue signaling are on point dude. Props for being so woke!


  8. #58
    Quote Originally Posted by TRaider View Post
    Grumpy your white guilt and virtue signaling are on point dude. Props for being so woke!
    You know I have not said one disrespectful thing to anyone on this board, and yet I see you can't resist doing so yourself. My intent was not to trigger you in anyway and if I did, I apologize. My hope is that once you reach adulthood you can read opinions that are different yours, and yet still be respectful.

  9. #59
    Amen. That testimony was so powerful that I changed my mind after some cautious introspection. I'm going to take an African American permanent marker and start blotting out any references to Confederates in the book I'm reading just in case they come across as glorifying the actions of men who may have been slaveholders or may have been neighbors to slaveholders or may have done business with a bank which financed slaveholders or who, if they were alive today, might eat at Chick-fil-A
    Suggestion: Formations, Suppression, Spawning, Leadership https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZqPsbvyD8s


    Old Pennsylvania Discord: https://discord.gg/MjxfZ5n

  10. #60
    Quote Originally Posted by Poorlaggedman View Post
    Amen. That testimony was so powerful that I changed my mind after some cautious introspection. I'm going to take an African American permanent marker and start blotting out any references to Confederates in the book I'm reading just in case they come across as glorifying the actions of men who may have been slaveholders or may have been neighbors to slaveholders or may have done business with a bank which financed slaveholders or who, if they were alive today, might eat at Chick-fil-A
    Brilliant retort and totally devastated my point. I guess I deserve it for triggering you so with my opinion.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •