"My daddy fought for the South"
#16
Re: "My daddy fought for the South"
In the era of Glasnost the Russians pulled down, removed or destroyed the vast majority of Lenin and Stalin statues, many of these were just dumped in parks for the public to deface, piss on and other such things. About 10 years later they realised just what they had done to their heritage, Stalin and Lenin were major players in their history, so many were repaired, put into sculpture parks etc so the public could see them and think about what had happened. A country's heritage can't be erased, so why not allow the people to see what did happen.
#17
Joined on April fools day
Joined: Apr 2012
Location: 30 miles from a decent grocery store.
Posts: 10,642
Re: "My daddy fought for the South"
Not suggesting anything except that those who fought for the Confederacy were fighting for the perpetuation of slavery. They weren't fighting to protect their culture or ways of life which varied from those of the North. Presidents Buchanan and Lincoln had no issues with the ways of the south except for the system of slavery which they did have an issue with.
As for subjugation that's another subject for another discussion. Included could be the native Indian tribes of Canada, The Australian aborigines , the Zulus, the New Zealand Maoris and so on.
As for subjugation that's another subject for another discussion. Included could be the native Indian tribes of Canada, The Australian aborigines , the Zulus, the New Zealand Maoris and so on.
#18
Re: "My daddy fought for the South"
I know back in ye olde days it was quite common for a rich widow/widower to shack up with a youngster, because the youngster could look after them and the youngster wanted the money (no social security back then) but still, it's 2017. I didn't realize having a parent who fought in the Civil War was still an option.
#20
Re: "My daddy fought for the South"
Charlie Chaplin? Steve Martin just father his first child while in his 70's
#22
Account Closed
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 2
Re: "My daddy fought for the South"
i had a Grandfather who was in his 90's when he died and I was I think 12. He was a generation or so older than my Grandparents, well my Mother's parents.
#24
Re: "My daddy fought for the South"
Oldest Guinness World Record "legal" father--92 years.
Oldest legal father | Guinness World Records
Wikipedia's "Oldest" father:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramjit_Raghav
Oldest legal father | Guinness World Records
Wikipedia's "Oldest" father:
Indian former wrestler and farmer who has been claimed by various news media as the world's oldest father. He resided in southern India with his wife. He claimed to have had his first child with his wife at age 94.
#25
Re: "My daddy fought for the South"
My brother-in-law's father was born in the 19th century. B-i-l is 45 or thereabouts and his father was 85 when he was conceived. He had passed on before b-i-l was born.
#27
Re: "My daddy fought for the South"
No it isn't. What they are doing is removing the glorification of people who were fighting to continue slavery. Denying it happened would actually be worse. If you think the statues to remind people of the civil war are good then you'd be in agreement that we replace the "war heroes" with a freed slave statue, for all the people who only learn history from looking at statues.
#28
Account Closed
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 2
Re: "My daddy fought for the South"
No it isn't. What they are doing is removing the glorification of people who were fighting to continue slavery. Denying it happened would actually be worse. If you think the statues to remind people of the civil war are good then you'd be in agreement that we replace the "war heroes" with a freed slave statue, for all the people who only learn history from looking at statues.
#29
Re: "My daddy fought for the South"
No it isn't. What they are doing is removing the glorification of people who were fighting to continue slavery. Denying it happened would actually be worse. If you think the statues to remind people of the civil war are good then you'd be in agreement that we replace the "war heroes" with a freed slave statue, for all the people who only learn history from looking at statues.
You can erect both and they already have. Yes, most people start to learn history from statutes and monuments. If they had 1/2 a brain it would peak their interest and make them investigate further.
Go one step further and remove all the statutes and monuments to the Union men and women who fought. Do you honesty believe they fought only because they believed in the elimination of slavery. That was a part of it but the main thrust of the war was because the south seceded from the Union over States' Rights. And yes, a major part of that right was the ability to continue to hold slaves but there were also other parts which included not having the federal government tell each state what they can and cannot do in any manner of governing within the boundaries of its state. The government at its inception left the states the ability to govern in any way that it chose. It was not until much later in history that that right was rescinded.
The people participating in the Civil War were not bad people. They were people who had a different culture and mindset from their counterparts in the north or south. Whether they wore gray or blue, they fought for the state they lived in and many for what they believed in.
Last edited by Rete; Jul 10th 2017 at 4:05 pm.
#30
Account Closed
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 2
Re: "My daddy fought for the South"
Thank you for the attempt at reading my mind. Just so you know, it didn't work.
You can erect both and they already have. Yes, most people start to learn history from statutes and monuments. If they had 1/2 a brain it would peak their interest and make them investigate further.
Go one step further and remove all the statutes and monuments to the Union men and women who fought. Do you honesty believe they fought only because they believed in the elimination of slavery. That was a part of it but the main thrust of the war was because the south seceded from the Union over States' Rights. And yes, a major part of that right was the ability to continue to hold slaves but there were also other parts which included not having the federal government tell each state what they can and cannot do in any manner of governing within the boundaries of its state. The government at its inception left the states the ability to govern in any way that it chose. It was not until much later in history that that right was rescinded.
The people participating in the Civil War were not bad people. They were people who had a different culture and mindset from their counterparts in the north or south. Whether they wore gray or blue, they fought for the state they lived in and many for what they believed in.
You can erect both and they already have. Yes, most people start to learn history from statutes and monuments. If they had 1/2 a brain it would peak their interest and make them investigate further.
Go one step further and remove all the statutes and monuments to the Union men and women who fought. Do you honesty believe they fought only because they believed in the elimination of slavery. That was a part of it but the main thrust of the war was because the south seceded from the Union over States' Rights. And yes, a major part of that right was the ability to continue to hold slaves but there were also other parts which included not having the federal government tell each state what they can and cannot do in any manner of governing within the boundaries of its state. The government at its inception left the states the ability to govern in any way that it chose. It was not until much later in history that that right was rescinded.
The people participating in the Civil War were not bad people. They were people who had a different culture and mindset from their counterparts in the north or south. Whether they wore gray or blue, they fought for the state they lived in and many for what they believed in.
To be fair there has been some good stuff on TV, Ken Burns comes to mind.