| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 04/13/2005 10:44:44 AM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:
Endless complaints. |
Posted on 12/31/2004 2:21:30 PM PST by Caipirabob
What's wrong about this photo? Or if you're a true-born Southerner, what's right?
While scanning through some of the up and coming movies in 2005, I ran across this intriguing title; "CSA: Confederate States of America (2005)". It's an "alternate universe" take on what would the country be like had the South won the civil war.
Stars with bars:
Suffice to say anything from Hollywood on this topic is sure to to bring about all sorts of controversial ideas and discussions. I was surprised that they are approaching such subject matter, and I'm more than a little interested.
Some things are better left dead in the past:
For myself, I was more than pleased with the homage paid to General "Stonewall" Jackson in Turner's "Gods and Generals". Like him, I should have like to believe that the South would have been compelled to end slavery out of Christian dignity rather than continue to enslave their brothers of the freedom that belong equally to all men. Obviously it didn't happen that way.
Would I fight for a South that believed in Slavery today? I have to ask first, would I know any better back then? I don't know. I honestly don't know. My pride for my South and my heritage would have most likely doomed me as it did so many others. I won't skirt the issue, in all likelyhood, slavery may have been an afterthought. Had they been the staple of what I considered property, I possibly would have already been past the point of moral struggle on the point and preparing to kill Northern invaders.
Compelling story or KKK wet dream?:
So what do I feel about this? The photo above nearly brings me to tears, as I highly respect Abraham Lincoln. I don't care if they kick me out of the South. Imagine if GW was in prayer over what to do about a seperatist leftist California. That's how I imagine Lincoln. A great man. I wonder sometimes what my family would have been like today. How many more of us would there be? Would we have held onto the property and prosperity that sustained them before the war? Would I have double the amount of family in the area? How many would I have had to cook for last week for Christmas? Would I have needed to make more "Pate De Fois Gras"?
Well, dunno about that either. Depending on what the previous for this movie are like, I may or may not see it. If they portray it as the United Confederacy of the KKK I won't be attending.
This generation of our clan speaks some 5 languages in addition to English, those being of recent immigrants to this nation. All of them are good Americans. I believe the south would have succombed to the same forces that affected the North. Immigration, war, economics and other huma forces that have changed the map of the world since history began.
Whatever. At least in this alternate universe, it's safe for me to believe that we would have grown to be the benevolent and humane South that I know it is in my heart. I can believe that slavery would have died shortly before or after that lost victory. I can believe that Southern gentlemen would have served the world as the model for behavior. In my alternate universe, it's ok that Spock has a beard. It's my alternate universe after all, it can be what I want.
At any rate, I lived up North for many years. Wonderful people and difficult people. I will always sing their praises as a land full of beautiful Italian girls, maple syrup and Birch beer. My uncle ribbed us once before we left on how we were going up North to live "with all the Yankees". Afterwards I always refered to him as royalty. He is, really. He's "King of the Rednecks". I suppose I'm his court jester.
So what do you think of this movie?
Thanks. The followers of Tommy Delusional are cultists, if you think about it.
As a matter of fact, the boldened font you used in the post he's complaining about is the default font for Salon's "TableTalk" BB.
Not that that means anything, but I thought that invoking a liberal website's practice ought to get him to back up a little. Awe and deference, don't you know.
Yeah, he used to be somebody else.
WWWD - What would Willie do?
Post a single lie from nolu chan. I have several from you.
Your recollection of events doesn't pass muster. The way I recall it, There was a dicsussion concerning the lack of success of the Union army in Texas; probably initiated by either rustbucket or GOPcapitalist. You responded with a list of what you considered considerable Union victories, one of which was the capture of Ft Jefferson Davis.
GOPcapitalist pointed out to you that Ft Davis was abandoned by the confederates, and that the Union forces had only to deal with indian raiders during the occupation, and you proceeded to engage in a symantics debate about the word 'capture.'
Sound about right to anyone else?
And there goes another capitan-ism.
Enlighten us, california-boy... what race is nolu chan?
For the life of me, I can't figure out why slurs like that are allowed to go unchecked from you, Espinola, mac, Partisan, and "the gang." You and your buddies spend more time bashing Americans and conservatives than the exiled brigade commander could have dreamed.
There is a growing rift in the Republican party between the religious and small-government conservatives and the "power at any cost so long as we're in charge" folks. You, Partisan, and Espinola are pounding at that wedge with a sledgehammer with every accusation of racism, every time you slur us as rednecks, every time you take a verbal dump on our confederate grandfathers.
If you'd like to discuss the war, the politics, or the politicians, that would be great. These threads used to be at least semi-civilized, and at one time were a great place for people to learn new 'stuff' about the war, the players, and our shared history. Since the arrival of you and Espinola, all of the reasoned Unionists have abandoned them, save Non-Sequitur, who still drops in from time to time. I used to like coming to the WBTS threads, picking up on whatever the hot topic was, and doing some outside reading to get up to speed or learn the unbiased truth. It's been months since that's happened, and nowadays when I click on the thread title, I expect to find nothing useful in the flamewar.
Inquiring minds want to know bump.
Then I guess I captured parts of California in my trip out there last May. Please send me the tax you owe me.
On the other hand, maybe I shouldn't claim to have captured parts of California. You Californians would probably want me to pay off some of the energy bills you ran up during your attempts to repeal the law of supply and demand.
The credit for holding your feet to the fire over loose use of the language belongs to GOPcapitalist.
Bump.
I can't remember the last time we discussed drawbacks of Lee's warfighting strategy, and the need for a unified command structure in the CSA. Or how Northern foodstuff distribution persisted and grew in the face of secession.
The last time we discussed trade, it was all about a corrupt war-profiteering scheme in the War Department and how Lincoln and Davis compromised principles to help political creatures make fat profits off organized smuggling through the lines: Davis because he was desperate, Lincoln because.......?
Thump-bump.
As the issues have unfolded and been reviewed by them, the Wlat Brigade show themselves to be coming from a position every more closely identifiable with neoliberalism. The chief difference between a neoconservative and a neoliberal being whether we should have a defense department, and whether liberals should try to learn something from the domestic policy failures of the 1950's.
It's getting harder to tell whether they're neoconservatives trying to drive Southern conservatives into an upstairs attic like Crazy Aunt Mary, where they can feed us table scraps and keep us under wraps so as not to embarrass them with their liberal neighbors, and then just wheel us to the polls on election day and bait us into voting a GOP straight ticket with a few down-ballot social initiatives, or whether they're neoliberals straining in the traces with their boy Slick Willie to split the GOP in two.
Funny how projection works. Substitute the name of Harry Jaffa in your little jab, and you've got a much better tableau of cultishness to work with.
Yeah, right -- no this, no that, but plenty of the other. Nah, I don't think I will, bait-shop boy. What are you going to do about it? Call me more names? We know you have an unlimited hall pass on flames.
It doesn't take a rescript from the pope to find out what kind of guy we're posting to.
free dixie,sw
free dixie,sw
Indeed. It was a classic case of taking a historical event and embellishing it to make it something more than it really was, likely due to a chronic lie addiction. I also seem to recall it was claimed that the so-called battle of Fort Davis struck a great "symbolic" blow to Richmond since the fort's namesake was Jefferson Davis. In reality, Richmond never even heard about it and nobody in the entire confederate government even knew that the yankees had camped out there for a single night before abandoning the place until after the war. Yet again, his bizarre need to embellish the truth with falsehoods kicked in and now he's mad because he got caught.
Really? Why don't you expose a couple, or better, post links to where you exposed and refuted them?
I remember the Fort Davis brouhaha -- I didn't post an opinion because I didn't have one, and because you guys know much more about it. But my memory serves up recollections of your insistence that the Texans showed cowardice -- you say stuff like that a lot -- and in short you displayed a great deal of hostile animus toward Texans generally on thin evidence.
No doubt the California columns faced considerable difficulties in operating far from any amenable bases; but you denied the same recognition to the Confederates operating in that theater, and insisted on trying to affix a badge of cowardly dishonor on them.
That's a pretty brash particularism to display in this forum, given the provenience of the couple living in the White House. Perhaps you're willing to give President Bush a pass, in consideration of his Yankee blood and New England education, and of the manorial ways of his family. But Laura Bush is 100% Texas girl, and there isn't an inch of her that is fake about anything. Yet you trash Texans with a ferocity approaching personal fetish.
Now, you can entertain any sort of crotchet you like, capitan, but when by the same token you deny other people the right to hold their own POV and try to belittle and even criminalize it as you and Rant-Boy Espinola habitually do with your rhetoric and his violent imagery of Southerners being killed in battle or dragged off to prison, then it's fair to ask whether you've got anyone's best interests at heart. You and Espinola have posted about enough of that "Reconstruction didn't go far enough/Get a rope" stuff.
Pounding on GOPcapitalist and trying to get him banned -- your and Espinola's garbage about "KIA's" is, like a burlesque danseuse's outfit, both tacky and revealing -- doesn't do anything for your POV or the website. It just exhibits a determination on your part to eliminate unassimilable POV's that can't be reconciled with your agenda of defending from the claims of history the author of the Civil War.
That this is the case can be shown by your lumping us all in together as The Enemy, notwithstanding that I have several important differences of opinion with these Southerners. That all disappears when you and Espinola begin your warmed-over William Lloyd Garrison act and begin trashing the Southern contingent over regional differences which you haven't been cautious enough to refrain from pointing out that you consider grossly revealing of Southern intellectual incapacity and cultural inferiority. You display your arraunt when you do, and you show up yourself more than the people you vilify.
Bump. It needed to be repeated.
This guy hits "abuse" on a photo of John Wilkes Booth taken in a studio, then posts imagery of Southerners being killed in battle.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.