News:

PD.com: "the lot of you are some of the most vicious, name calling, vile examples of humanity I've had the misfortune of attempting to communicate with.  Even attempting to mimic the general mood of the place toward people who think differently leaves a slimy feel on my skin.  Reptilian, even."

Main Menu

A curiosity about the South, for people who live here

Started by The Dark Monk, July 02, 2012, 09:59:52 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

The Good Reverend Roger

Quote from: Golden Applesauce on July 06, 2012, 01:09:27 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on July 05, 2012, 01:49:14 PM
Quote from: Golden Applesauce on July 04, 2012, 07:48:48 PM
Of course the south won. They were fighting for freedom, which is always the right thing to do - it was a moral victory.

Raw and stinking bullshit.  They were fighting for a static aristocracy.

They were fighting for the freedom to determine how to run their own economy and government. You can't really say that someone has the God-given right to pursue happiness, and then turn around and say "Well, but only if your method of pursuing happiness doesn't include human trafficking." These were honest, Christian farmers being faced with the possibility of being unable to leave their workforce to their children. Similarly, being forced allow illiterate non-citizens with no stake in the country to cast votes defeats the entire purpose of democracy - it's not self-determination if an outside power is manipulating the voting population to  its own ends.

It's not Freedom if you can't abuse it.

I'm leaving this thread now, out of sheer depression brought on by watching two supposed bipeds defend/support this sort of shit.
" It's just that Depeche Mode were a bunch of optimistic loveburgers."
- TGRR, shaming himself forever, 7/8/2017

"Billy, when I say that ethics is our number one priority and safety is also our number one priority, you should take that to mean exactly what I said. Also quality. That's our number one priority as well. Don't look at me that way, you're in the corporate world now and this is how it works."
- TGRR, raising the bar at work.

LMNO

I think I got reverse Poe's Law-ed.  I could have sworn that GA was rolling on satire.

Cain

I'm 100% certain GA is trolling here.

I may be wrong, and if so I will fully admit it, but I'm pretty sure he's poking fun at every defense of the South that has been made.

tyrannosaurus vex

I'm kind of surprised at the way people buy Civil War history exactly as packaged, and how quick they are to make the assume any defense of the South is evidence of racism. I guess the campaign to equate the two has been pretty successful for it to infect a group of people deeply distrustful of authority. I still think it's artificial, though.
Evil and Unfeeling Arse-Flenser From The City of the Damned.

The Good Reverend Roger

Quote from: v3x on July 06, 2012, 03:00:11 PM
I'm kind of surprised at the way people buy Civil War history exactly as packaged, and how quick they are to make the assume any defense of the South is evidence of racism. I guess the campaign to equate the two has been pretty successful for it to infect a group of people deeply distrustful of authority. I still think it's artificial, though.

They will say the same thing about the teabaggers in 50 years.
" It's just that Depeche Mode were a bunch of optimistic loveburgers."
- TGRR, shaming himself forever, 7/8/2017

"Billy, when I say that ethics is our number one priority and safety is also our number one priority, you should take that to mean exactly what I said. Also quality. That's our number one priority as well. Don't look at me that way, you're in the corporate world now and this is how it works."
- TGRR, raising the bar at work.

LMNO


tyrannosaurus vex

Fair enough, I guess. My problem is I wasn't alive 150 years ago. I'll leave it at not supporting the Confederacy per se, but having a somewhat naive and idealistic affection for the political arguments they used.

I do think adding the (slavery-unrelated) CSA Constitution provisions above would substantially improve our own, though.
Evil and Unfeeling Arse-Flenser From The City of the Damned.

The Good Reverend Roger

Quote from: v3x on July 06, 2012, 03:24:23 PM
Fair enough, I guess. My problem is I wasn't alive 150 years ago. I'll leave it at not supporting the Confederacy per se, but having a somewhat naive and idealistic affection for the political arguments they used.

I do think adding the (slavery-unrelated) CSA Constitution provisions above would substantially improve our own, though.

One Northern general, guy by the name of Chamberlain, wrote the best argument against the CSA...That it was an incipient hereditary aristocracy, and that this alone made it worth fighting.

Basically, the South fought for two reasons:

1.  The Smoot/Hawley tariff, arguably the stupidest idea ever to come out of congress, and

2.  "States rights"...Specifically, the right to their "peculiar institution", which was how they referred to "chattel slavery".  This was in fact the driving force behind the war, no matter what revisionists say, the proof of which is that they seceded upon the election of Lincoln - as they said they would - because they perceived him to be an abolitionist.

Don't go looking for noble causes where there are none.  The South was going to be for "Quality People" (rich Whites), with the buckra beneath them, and the slaves at the bottom.

" It's just that Depeche Mode were a bunch of optimistic loveburgers."
- TGRR, shaming himself forever, 7/8/2017

"Billy, when I say that ethics is our number one priority and safety is also our number one priority, you should take that to mean exactly what I said. Also quality. That's our number one priority as well. Don't look at me that way, you're in the corporate world now and this is how it works."
- TGRR, raising the bar at work.

kingyak

My local news station (which specializes in throwing shit in the air rather than reporting news) covered the prom dress thing. The completely expected irony was that the people who were up in arms about the violations of the girls First Amendment rights were the same ones who are always all for violation of students' Fourth Amendment rights when the argument of the day is about drug testing or strip searches.

On the flag:
Short answer: Except for a few open racists and reenactors (who are their own special brand of crazy), most people who wear/fly/whatever the confederate flag have little or no idea what it's supposed to mean. It's about tribal branding, like wearing a Nike shirt or St. Louis Cardinals hat.
Long answer: http://goatheadgumbo.blogspot.com/2012/05/heritage-or-hate.html
"When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro."-HST

Mesozoic Mister Nigel

#54
I am really surprised how many people here actually believe that the Civil War was about slavery. And Thanksgiving was about indians and pilgrims cooperating and sitting down to dinner together.

Sorry guys, but although there are valid perspectives on either side, Vex has done his homework. The war wasn't about great justice, it was about keeping the union together for economic reasons. Slavery was a divisive factor, but as Vex rightly pointed out, it was a dying institution even before the war began. It was used as a politically divisive instrument in much the same way as abortion and gay marriage are used now, but all existing evidence (of which there is a lot) indicates that the Civil War would have occurred even had slavery already been abolished in the South. The war actually exacerbated existing racism in ways that we are still dealing with the effects of.

As far as the South having a heavily stratified class system with what essentially amounts to a hereditary aristocracy, that was and is true. Not particularly relevant, unless you are in favor of the mentality that if we don't like a culture we have a moral imperative to invade it and force it to be like us, but true. I find it repugnant, but that's their culture, and war didn't beat it out of them. In fact, it probably reinforced it. Regardless of how much we may dislike it and believe that the North was in the right, the South was (IMO) within their rights to secede.

"I'm guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk," Charles Wick said. "It was very complicated."


tyrannosaurus vex

Quote from: PROFOUNDLY RETARDED CHARLIE MANSON on July 06, 2012, 06:16:37 PM
I am really surprised how many people here actually believe that the Civil War was about slavery. And Thanksgiving was about indians and pilgrims cooperating and sitting down to dinner together.

Sorry guys, but although there are valid perspectives on either side, Vex has done his homework. The war wasn't about great justice, it was about keeping the union together for economic reasons. Slavery was a divisive factor, but as Vex rightly pointed out, it was a dying institution even before the war began. It was used as a politically divisive instrument in much the same way as abortion and gay marriage are used now, but all existing evidence (of which there is a lot) indicates that the Civil War would have occurred even had slavery already been abolished in the South. The war actually exacerbated existing racism in ways that we are still dealing with the effects of.

As far as the South having a heavily stratified class system with what essentially amounts to a hereditary aristocracy, that was and is true. Not particularly relevant, unless you are in favor of the mentality that if we don't like a culture we have a moral imperative to invade it and force it to be like us, but true. I find it repugnant, but that's their culture, and war didn't beat it out of them. In fact, it probably reinforced it. Regardless of how much we may dislike it and believe that the North was in the right, the South was (IMO) within their rights to secede.

I just think it's unfortunate that real self-determination was the primary casualty of the war. In using slavery to justify both sides of the war, we effectively sunk the entire argument over a State's Rights -- which, contrary to what they tell you in school, really is an argument on its own and doesn't depend on racism or even conservatism. But thanks to 150 years of equating "States' Rights" with slavery, the Civil War, ignorance, and backwards thinking, we can't have that discussion anymore.
Evil and Unfeeling Arse-Flenser From The City of the Damned.

Mesozoic Mister Nigel

Quote from: v3x on July 06, 2012, 06:28:09 PM
Quote from: PROFOUNDLY RETARDED CHARLIE MANSON on July 06, 2012, 06:16:37 PM
I am really surprised how many people here actually believe that the Civil War was about slavery. And Thanksgiving was about indians and pilgrims cooperating and sitting down to dinner together.

Sorry guys, but although there are valid perspectives on either side, Vex has done his homework. The war wasn't about great justice, it was about keeping the union together for economic reasons. Slavery was a divisive factor, but as Vex rightly pointed out, it was a dying institution even before the war began. It was used as a politically divisive instrument in much the same way as abortion and gay marriage are used now, but all existing evidence (of which there is a lot) indicates that the Civil War would have occurred even had slavery already been abolished in the South. The war actually exacerbated existing racism in ways that we are still dealing with the effects of.

As far as the South having a heavily stratified class system with what essentially amounts to a hereditary aristocracy, that was and is true. Not particularly relevant, unless you are in favor of the mentality that if we don't like a culture we have a moral imperative to invade it and force it to be like us, but true. I find it repugnant, but that's their culture, and war didn't beat it out of them. In fact, it probably reinforced it. Regardless of how much we may dislike it and believe that the North was in the right, the South was (IMO) within their rights to secede.

I just think it's unfortunate that real self-determination was the primary casualty of the war. In using slavery to justify both sides of the war, we effectively sunk the entire argument over a State's Rights -- which, contrary to what they tell you in school, really is an argument on its own and doesn't depend on racism or even conservatism. But thanks to 150 years of equating "States' Rights" with slavery, the Civil War, ignorance, and backwards thinking, we can't have that discussion anymore.

Yup.
"I'm guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk," Charles Wick said. "It was very complicated."


hooplala

"Soon all of us will have special names" — Professor Brian O'Blivion

"Now's not the time to get silly, so wear your big boots and jump on the garbage clowns." — Bob Dylan?

"Do I contradict myself?
Very well then I contradict myself,
(I am large, I contain multitudes.)"
— Walt Whitman

tyrannosaurus vex

Quote from: Hoopla on July 06, 2012, 06:36:32 PM
This is why we can't have nice things.

DAMN YOU, LINCOLN THE SOUTH AMERICA HUMAN NATURE !!
Evil and Unfeeling Arse-Flenser From The City of the Damned.

Cain

People in The South were idiots.  Not surprising really, given their idea of a strategy was "threatening, then direct military attack on a nation with more money, greater population and greater industrial output" than they had.

Obviously anyone who thought that was a good idea probably really thought they could get away with seceding with no consequences, either.  Sure, nice in theory, but ignores the practicality of the situation, which is those with more guns gets to make the rules.  Also ignores the history of the USA directly after founding, with The Whisky Rebellion, Shays Rebellion etc