You’re engagining in a whole lot of adjectives and puffery to totally blow past the meaning and intent of my reply to you. Not impressive.
You’re railing against the facts of the past. That railing does not change them, nor does it change the thoughts and motivations of those who lived in that past. You’re projecting modern sensibilities upon a time when human bondage was not viewed as the abject horror that it is in the present time. You engage in anachronism in order to condemn people who participated in a legal practice that had existed, in sundry forms, for all recorded history, and in fact still does.
Go right ahead and sit smugly on your perch in their unknown future and bloviate away. Maybe you can actually alter the past, but I doubt it. You’re dealing with a people who do not care for your brand of revisionism.
As far as communism, well, your completely unhinged way of dealing with a past you dislike is far more indicative of a totalitarian than it would be of myself and people such as me. We do not forget the past and we do not engage in revisionism. We do not reject our forbears on the basis of modern sensibility that other, more recent arrivals seem to believe to encompass the entirety of our history. Recent arrivals who brought communism with them. Your people, I suspect.
So, chew on that for a while and maybe you can come up with some other word you believe to be a hotbutton that will get you out of the ridiculous hole you’ve dug for yourself here, advocating genocide, then trying to come across as some sort of Cold Warrior.
Fool. Begone.
Nonsense. At least a large number of people living at the time viewed human bondage as an abject horror, and became quite belligerent in activity to rid this country of the practice. It was a contemporary struggle, obviously, and it should be clear to any thoughtful person that the Southern leadership were very aware of the evil nature of the system they fought to maintain. Your argument is akin to defending Bernie Madoff as being just ignorant of the evil he was doing for lucre. I project, quite reasonably, that at least educated people of the time were informed and understood what they were doing when holding slaves, but they got a lot of money for doing it - and didn't want to give it up.
You engage in anachronism in order to condemn people who participated in a legal practice that had existed, in sundry forms, for all recorded history
Denied. My analysis is current, and correct. The people of regard condemned themselves, in their own time. Would you join me in the condemnation of Islamic Honor killing? Or would you perhaps excuse it as "it's just their way!"
We do not reject our forbears on the basis of modern sensibility that other, more recent arrivals seem to believe to encompass the entirety of our history. Recent arrivals who brought communism with them. Your people, I suspect.
Sorry bud, wrong again, my history traces back to a signer of the Declaration of Independence.
Go right ahead and sit smugly on your perch in their unknown future and bloviate away.
Hey, watch that rough stuff. I, like you, enjoy bloviating!
Yes, genocide was a over the top. Let me apologize for the hyperbole. Genocide can never be justified. It was a shameful thing to suggest.