The Left assigns strawman motivation to their enemies. They will not debate against their opponent's real positions.
They always pretend to have the moral high ground.
Posted on 05/25/2020 8:32:14 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
The New York Times editorial board published a column this weekend that asked readers to consider, "Why Does the U.S. Military Celebrate White Supremacy?" At the crux of their argument, the board, self-described as "a group of opinion journalists whose views are informed by expertise, research, debate and certain longstanding values," says that military bases in the southern states bearing the names of Confederate leaders should be renamed.
"It is time to rename bases for American heroes — not racist traitors," the article promises readers as its thesis. To support the argument, the writers compare the history of the Confederacy to modern day white supremacy and draw on the 2015 massacre in South Carolina as proof to support that claim. Dylann Roof, who killed nine people attending church in Charleston in the name of wanting to begin a race war, was convicted of multiple hate crimes and murder. He is currently awaiting execution for his heinous acts.
The Times specifically calls out 10 military bases in the south that bear the names of Confederate leaders as being problematic totems of white supremacy. Among them is Fort Bragg in North Carolina, which was named for General Braxton Bragg, long considered by historians of the south to have been a disastrous leader during the Civil War.
"Apologists often describe the names as a necessary gesture of reconciliation in the wake of the Civil War," the board writes. "In truth, the namings reflect a federal embrace of white supremacy that found its most poisonous expression in military installations."
Fort Bragg, however, even with a name that the Times considers to be a “federal embrace of white supremacy” is currently the largest military instillation in the world with over 50,000 active duty personnel. It is the home to a diverse population of military families and is home to the United States Army Special Operations Command. There is no record available that shows a correlation to Braxton Bragg’s name and race-driven crimes in the United States.
The editorial board of the Grey Lady then revises history entirely by characterizing the whole cause of the south in the Civil War as being driven by white supremacy and a desire to "keep black people in chains." Referring to leaders of the Confederacy as "traitors" on multiple occasions, the board dismisses any defense which claims the base designations are historic marks that represent only the individuals, not ideologies.
"The first problem with this argument is that, as individuals, these men were traitors," the board wrote. "These rebel officers, who were willing to destroy the United States to keep black people in chains, are synonymous with the racist ideology that drove them to treason."
The base naming, the column concludes, was an effort to placate the south after the war and embrace the era of Jim Crow laws. What the editorial board did not discover through "expertise, research, and debate," however, was that not long after the Civil War, the United States was at war with Spain. Bitterness from the bloody fighting between the north and the south during the Civil War caused national concern that conflict with Spain and subsequent foreign affairs would not be successful without a united front.
Allowing the U.S. military bases to bear names of southern leaders was seen as an olive branch to the south, still reeling from the loss of the war and the blood-soaked battlefields in their backyards. It was never meant to condone racial prejudice, which was still very prominent in northern and southern states at that time.
Though all historians not blinded by modern-day political ideology agree that the causes of the Civil War included many more factors than a desire to keep slaves, the revisionist history presented in this editorial also dismisses the deaths of nearly 300,000 Confederate husbands, fathers, and sons still buried in national cemeteries and in American family plots across the country. Whether or not their descendants agree with why they chose to fight more than 150 years ago, those soldiers and are still regarded as patriots who fought bravely by many Americans today. The great majority of the Confederate Army were not, in fact, slave owners.
This editorial claims that the southern military bases being named for Confederates motivates murderers to commit atrocious acts of violence in the name of white supremacy. Nowhere in their screed, however, do they present statistics that show a direct correlation between bases with Confederate names and violent crimes against black Americans.
The New York Times chose Memorial Day weekend to make their case to rename military bases, not to honor fallen fighters for American freedom. Naming long deceased military leaders as inspirations for horrific hate crimes perpetuated by violent psychopaths is without factual base or plausibility and serves only as a way to further the political divide between the urban elite and the American south.
The tradition of Memorial Day in the United States began as "Decoration Day" in the years just after the Civil War. Mothers and wives placed wreaths and flowers on the graves of soldiers throughout the southern and northern states, grieving for the American loss of life on both sides. The graves of the Confederate dead still bear the names of their descendants now living not just in the south, but throughout the United States. With or without permission of the New York Times editorial board, their sacrifice will continue to be memorialized on this solemn day.
Looks like New York City, the state and the newspaper all have to change their names too. They are named after the Duke of York who basically founded the international slave trade.
The Left assigns strawman motivation to their enemies. They will not debate against their opponent's real positions.
They always pretend to have the moral high ground.
Yawn. This is really the best they can come up with amid everything going on?
Just imagine if the NYT had framed the story “Why does the U.S. military celebrate Democrats?” since none of the bases in question were named after Republicans.
The racists at the NYTimes trying to falsely tag others as racists. Funny.
“The NYT is filled with racists of every race. What they all have in common is hatred of the white race.”
I bet that if someone did a search of the headlines/stories printed in the NYT over the last 150 years you would find a vast number of overtly racist/white supremacist articles. That would put these leftist SOBs on the defensive and show the world their history of racism.
Journalists whose views are informed by expertise, research, debate and certain longstanding values.
And remember junk bonds are a good investment too along with electric fly swatters.
Well stated.
Personally, I do not lend any credence at all to those who opine on the military, who could never be bothered to serve in the military. It’s on an equal par to the democRATs who constantly want to wax eloquent on matters of Christianity, Morals, Honor, Duty, Decency and Integrity. They, by and large, no not of which they speak. I do not permit such people to waste my time.
And of course, we respond to this by not defining the differences between white supremacy, white pride, racism, identarianism, etc. etc. Which means we let the NYT define our terms for us... which means we lose.
“opinion journalists whose views are informed by expertise, research, debate and certain longstanding values,..”
First, they are not journalists. They are propagandists. Second, They are not informed by expertise, research and debate, but simply their longstanding “values”. And what are those values — radical liberalism. The Times can’t be honest about anything because the Times is a radical, leftist propaganda machine that is useless for actually informing the American people on any subject.
Isn’t this the same group of loons trying to re-write US History (1619 Project)?
Ironic that the left and NYT propagandists do this when more and more leftists/communists/socialists join the military for no other reason than to enhance their political resumes (Tulsi Gabbard is the perfect example of this) and then exploit their military service and have lots of photo ops taken in uniform when they run for office.
Stateside US Army bases are usually named for someone from the state in which they are located.
NYT trying to blame the military for Democrat white supremacists
To the NYT, all the founding fathers were racist traitors.
Which is why I still struggle with the order and sequence of their trials and hangings.
I know they are after the politicians, but should they be before, or after the professors?
“White Sumpremmacy” has become the new R word.
Precisely !
Hypocrisy is the foundational stone of the socialist left.
Readers of The New York Times don’t know who the Duke of York was.
Nor do they know that Brown and Yale universities were also named after men who amassed their considerable fortunes in the slave trade.
Tell this to all the black and brown that gave their lives for this country. What a bunch of dick heads!
That could be why we named the fort after him.
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.