Black Lives Matter topple statues

[RoofGardener]

I was somewhat bemused to note that - last Friday - BLM rioters toppled a statue in San Francisco's Golden Gate Park. 

The statue was of one Ulysses S. Grant. The general most closely associated with the defeat of the Confederate army. As president, he abolished many rules and regulations that restricted Black involvement in the Judiciary and the Civil Service. He sent the Army in to combat the KKK. He attempted to treat honourably with the American Indians, and appointed the first Native American cabinet minister. He lobbied intensively for equality of Black Americans. Indeed, in his presidential election campaign, many Black American's voted for him. 

And THIS is the person that Black Lives Matter thought was a bad influence, and had to have his statue torn down ? 

Well, it KIND OF makes sense. BLM is underpinned by the extreme Left Wing, and by Democrats. 

Recall the Democrat slogan during Grant's time: "This is a White Man’s Country; Let White Men Rule.".  In that light, they would have regarded Ulysses S Grant as a race traitor. 

 

Edited June 24, 2020 by RoofGardener

[Duke Wellington]

Trump threatening to give all rioters and vandalisers of statues 10 years in prison:

Having spent so long creeping around people on eggshells who are offended by this and that, the far-left have become tyrannical. If the democrats get elected then there are worse problems coming.

Edited June 24, 2020 by Cookie Monster

[lightly]

I just want to add, that the civil war was about more than just slavery...the south's rebellion was also about state's rights and the ever increasing encroachment of federal power , and taxation.      Lincoln said that if the war could be won without freeing the slaves...he'd be ok with that.   Emancipation is what tipped the scales and shortened the war.  

[Jarocal]

13 minutes ago, lightly said:

I just want to add, that the civil war was about more than just slavery...the south's rebellion was also about state's rights and the ever increasing encroachment of federal power , and taxation.      Lincoln said that if the war could be won without freeing the slaves...he'd be ok with that.   Emancipation is what tipped the scales and shortened the war.  

It was to an extent. The southern states seemed to have no objections to federalism when it came to laws in regard to escaped slaves who made it North to attempt a shot at freedom. 

Edited June 24, 2020 by Jarocal

[lightly]

1 hour ago, Jarocal said:

It was to an extent. The southern states seemed to have no objections to federalism when it came to laws in regard to escaped slaves who made it North to attempt a shot at freedom. 

  Ah,  that makes sence.     I can sort of sympathize with the south in general and people like Robert E. Lee ....they were caught between loyalties to the nation and loyalty to thier state.   I guess that's why they preferred the idea of a Confederation of states..which is a dififerent power structure..  More state oriented than nationally oriented?   they weren't rebelling against their country, so much as what they saw as oppressive federal power.    ??  They thought it was patriotic I suppose ? Freedom fighters in a way?  Power to the people !  ...then the state....then the nation.   

 

 

Edited June 24, 2020 by lightly

[RavenHawk]

There are three things to walk away with.  1) BLM is a racist organization.  2) Black Lives do not matter to them.  No lives do.  Their concern is anarchy.  This is the New Cultural Revolution.  All our history must be erased so that tyranny can reign.  3) You know it must be an election year.  The Democrats are riling up the Blacks again.  But then after the elections are done, Democrats will forget about the Blacks even being there.  When will the Black learn that they are being used?  This “systemic problem” can all be solved by the Black doing a deep retrospective and then decide to stand on their own two feet.  It has nothing to do with external stimuli (i.e. police or even Whites).  The Black family must be restored.  That is the number 1 problem.  Not having a stable family environment makes it difficult to succeed.

 

These rioters do not know their history.  That comes from a liberal education.  There was a man by the name of Ely Parker (Brevet Brigadier General) that was at Lee’s surrender.  Parker had been with Grant ever since Vicksburg.  The surrender documents are in Parker’s hand.  In an attempt to break the ice in an awkward situation, Lee shook Parker’s hand and said that he “was glad to see a real American here.”  Parker replied, “Sir, we are all Americans.”  Parker was a Seneca Indian.  Before joining Grant, he tried to organize an Iroquois regiment to fight for the Union but was turned down.  If that regiment had been raised, it might have made the West a bit less bloody.  But it was Parker that became Commissioner of Indian Affairs under a Grant Presidency (the Cabinet position you mentioned).  If these hoodlums knew something about history, and not indoctrination, then maybe they would respect our history?

[CrimsonKing]

8 hours ago, lightly said:

I just want to add, that the civil war was about more than just slavery...the south's rebellion was also about state's rights and the ever increasing encroachment of federal power , and taxation.      Lincoln said that if the war could be won without freeing the slaves...he'd be ok with that.   Emancipation is what tipped the scales and shortened the war.  

Almost all of what you said is vanishing from history books and has been for the better part of the last 2 decades...

I remember when i think it was an old journal of Lincolns was found in the early 2000's,and his thoughts about "freeing the slaves" was a whole lot different than the whimsical,all loving,and inclusive Abe he was portrayed as in our elementary and High school history books.

I remember "academics" at the time having serious discussions about weather they should even make it public information.

[+and-then]

I saw this piece from the Federalist and thought I'd share it with anyone who is looking at the mob's actions and saying - "it's just a statue"

https://thefederalist.com/2020/06/23/everywhere-statues-are-torn-down-by-the-mob-history-promises-people-are-next/

"A society that believes in itself builds monuments, a sick society does not, and a dying society watches as they are torn down"

 

This is a powerful glimpse into history and a stark reminder of what WILL be next if it isn't resisted.  

[+and-then]

5 hours ago, CrimsonKing said:

Almost all of what you said is vanishing from history books and has been for the better part of the last 2 decades...

I remember when i think it was an old journal of Lincolns was found in the early 2000's,and his thoughts about "freeing the slaves" was a whole lot different than the whimsical,all loving,and inclusive Abe he was portrayed as in our elementary and High school history books.

I remember "academics" at the time having serious discussions about weather they should even make it public information.

Times sure do change, eh?  I got the memo on Abe being down with ANYTHING that would preserve the Union.  Freeing slaves was something he believed in but it was a purely political calculation when he wrote the EO.  And all that wisdom from a public school in Mobile, Alabama.  Imagine that.  We usually were tied with Mississippi for 49th or 50th poorest states at that time.  The TRULY depressing fact of today is that most college grads don't know as much history as a B student from those schools in that era.  That isn't a mistake or an oversight.  To make room for "hope and change" you have to erase memory of any better time.

[acidhead]

 

[CrimsonKing]

1 minute ago, and then said:

Times sure do change, eh?  I got the memo on Abe being down with ANYTHING that would preserve the Union.  Freeing slaves was something he believed in but it was a purely political calculation when he wrote the EO.  And all that wisdom from a public school in Mobile, Alabama.  Imagine that.  We usually were tied with Mississippi for 49th or 50th poorest states at that time.  The TRULY depressing fact of today is that most college grads don't know as much history as a B student from those schools in that era.  That isn't a mistake or an oversight.  To make room for "hope and change" you have to erase memory of any better time.

I saw Trumps statement of what's next Jesus,Washington,ect.

Then sure enough a clip on my news feed,a top BLM guy wants white jesus gone!...Man alive is Europe gonna have some expensive "renovations"...art,cathedrals,ect.

Yeah there's a few college students who train at the gym,i'm not exactly sure what happened to the education system,but late millenials and Gen Z are pretty clueless on a vast majority of real life situations and actual useful knowledge...

They're good on computers and whatever major they have and that is it!...sadly i know a few grads who can't get good paying jobs because their majors were useless garbage.

[+and-then]

And the hits just keep on comin':

https://www.foxnews.com/media/black-lives-matter-leader-burn-down-system

From what I've been told, BLM isn't a political movement, it's a loose coalition of human rights groups or some such.  I wonder where this guy fits in with human rights?  Goes on a national television broadcast and basically threatens to burn the system down if the U.S. doesn't give BLM what they want.  He seems to be of the opinion that his group has the power to follow through with that threat.  He and his supporters might be about to win some stupid prizes...

[Setton]

20 hours ago, and then said:

I saw this piece from the Federalist and thought I'd share it with anyone who is looking at the mob's actions and saying - "it's just a statue"

https://thefederalist.com/2020/06/23/everywhere-statues-are-torn-down-by-the-mob-history-promises-people-are-next/

"A society that believes in itself builds monuments, a sick society does not, and a dying society watches as they are torn down"

 

This is a powerful glimpse into history and a stark reminder of what WILL be next if it isn't resisted.  

If that's the case, you're wanting to treat the symptom, not the disease.

As for what the disease is, I'm sure there are about 350,000,000 different answers.

Buy no doubt yours is the only right one 

[Tatetopa]

https://iowaculture.gov/history/education/educator-resources/primary-source-sets/civil-war/cornerstone-speech-alexander#:~:text=Alexander Hamilton Stephens%2C vice president,"immediate cause" of secession.

https://www.battlefields.org/learn/primary-sources/cornerstone-speech

This is not new friends.  History has been dickered forever.  Fifty years ago when I was in school in Texas, my teachers told me that the Civil War was not about slavery, it was about states' rights.  We sure liked to think of it that way.

You can read this in a number of places.  It is the speech Alexander Hamilton Sterphens made to justify Southern Succession from the Union.  It is long and does indeed outline some different states' rights.  But he makes no bones about the Primary Cause of Succession.

But not to be tedious in enumerating the numerous changes for the better, allow me to allude to one other though last, not least. The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution African slavery as it exists amongst us the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the "rock upon which the old Union would split." He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact. But whether he fully comprehended the great truth upon which that rock stood and stands, may be doubted. The prevailing ideas entertained by him and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old constitution, were that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with, but the general opinion of the men of that day was that, somehow or other in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away. This idea, though not incorporated in the constitution, was the prevailing idea at that time. The constitution, it is true, secured every essential guarantee to the institution while it should last, and hence no argument can be justly urged against the constitutional guarantees thus secured, because of the common sentiment of the day. Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the government built upon it fell when the "storm came and the wind blew."

Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner-stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth. 

A lot of good ole boys still believe that, even some in my family.

[+and-then]

On 6/25/2020 at 7:22 PM, Tatetopa said:

A lot of good ole boys still believe that, even some in my family.

No doubt they do.  There is a world of difference between acknowledging that racism still exists and demonstrating that it is still systemic. One certainty, IMO, is that if Democrat politicians are allowed to virtue signal by creating laws that make police careers as welcome as the plague, the most vulnerable will suffer the worst.

[acidhead]

LOL

 

[GoldenWolf]

On 6/24/2020 at 2:53 AM, RoofGardener said:

Recall the Democrat slogan during Grant's time: "This is a White Man’s Country; Let White Men Rule.".  In that light, they would have regarded Ulysses S Grant as a race traitor. 

It makes more sense when you think of it as North and South instead of Democrats and Republicans.

[Jarocal]

27 minutes ago, GoldenWolf said:

It makes more sense when you think of it as North and South instead of Democrats and Republicans.

It would make more sense to deal with the system issues plaguing American society through the failure of the elected government than to topple inanimate objects.

[GoldenWolf]

2 minutes ago, Jarocal said:

It would make more sense to deal with the system issues plaguing American society through the failure of the elected government than to topple inanimate objects.

True, but some inanimate objects inspire elected government officials in very bad ways, which is in turn passed onto the people. So they are an issue, one of lots.

[acidhead]

Hey hey ho ho these racist cops have got to go!

Hey hey ho ho these racist cops have got to go!

LOLOLOLOL

 

[Tatetopa]

2 hours ago, and then said:

No doubt they do.  There is a world of difference between acknowledging that racism still exists and demonstrating that it is still systemic. One certainty, IMO, is that if Democrat politicians are allowed to virtue signal by creating laws that make police careers as welcome as the plague, the most vulnerable will suffer the worst.

I don't think it has to be that way andthen.

 The military has a code of conduct.  Our soldiers from all branches of the service are expected to follow that code, even in combat zones.  Transgressions get reported by other soldiers who are proud of the standards they hold.  Its not perfect, but few would argue that it hampers the US military in pursuit of military objectives.

Being a soldier is a good career for many young people and I have not known any who were ashamed of their service.

Being a member of the police could be another good career if there were opportunities, good pay, and pride.

Democrats or Republicans can screw just about anything up, but maybe some non-partisan community members will get a say.

 

[+and-then]

2 hours ago, acidhead said:

LOL

They sound rather discomforted about being challenged, don't they?  That just shows how childish they are.  This whole rage overdose thing is getting boring.

[+and-then]

15 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

Being a member of the police could be another good career if there were opportunities, good pay, and pride

That is more of a legitimate structural deficiency than racism, IMO.  Most cities aren't going to prioritize high pay for cops.  The issue of pride or esprit de corps within a department is more about the quality of leadership they cultivate but the central problem with what the Dems seem to want to do, is that cops are not going to do a nasty, thankless, dangerous job when they know that on top of all that, there is a political hatchet job waiting on them anytime they make a mistake.  If they realize that any decision they make can be reviewed and they can be charged criminally or beggared through a civil suit, why on earth would good people want to take that career path?

[Tatetopa]

1 minute ago, and then said:

That is more of a legitimate structural deficiency than racism, IMO.

Yes it is and that is how it should be addressed if politics will get out of the way.  

[Dejarma]

On 6/24/2020 at 10:53 AM, RoofGardener said:

And THIS is the person that Black Lives Matter thought was a bad influence, and had to have his statue torn down ?

yep, another great example of not thinking, just acting!

But this has nothing to do with that really, does it?

It has nothing to do with colour/ creed/ race etc.. It's to do with brainless idiots that use situations like this to feel justified acting in this way IMO!