White without Apology

TooGoodReports ^ | 08/13/03 | Bernard Chapin

[ought-six]

Oh, how different things would have been had there never been a War. I have always bee of the position that the War was the greatest tragedy this country even suffered. I've always said I wish things never would have got to that point. But I've also always saud that I understand why the South did what it did, and did what it felt it had to do. I just wish things could have been worked out so that it never got to that point.

[WhiskeyPapa]

Read the damn proclamation yourself if you don't believe me.

I dunno. The EP seems to have had the intended effect. Jefferson Davis called the EP "the most despicable act ever committed by guilty man."

You don't agree with that, do you?

Walt

[Ditto]

Look at the date of the quote you cited, my friend! It is June, 1865, a couple months after the surrender! Since the EP went into effect in January, 1863, 2-1/2 years ealier, by your logic the Texas slaves were freed at that time, which is clearly no the historical fact. And where, pray, did the alleged "3 million" slaves that were freed between January, 1863 and December, 1865 come from? Brazil? Haiti? They sure as hell didn't come from any Southern state, or the Confederacy would have heard something about it, and at least commented on it (which, if you knew history at all, never happened). So, before you show your immaturity and ignorance by saying my comment (based on historical fact) is "Marxist" (that's projection for you!), I suggest you read even the most basic history text.

Talk about ignorance! What Texas law freed the slaves in Texas in June of 65? What Federal Law did so other than the EP? Texas was simply last because that was the last place in the Confederacy to be reached by Federal troops. The slaves in Georgia, South Caroilina, Florida, Virginia and the rest were free months and in some cases years eariler. Read about the thousands of slaves who followed Sherman's columns through Georgia.

There were 4 million slaves in the US the day the war started. By June of 1865, over 3 million of them had been freed by the EP.

[Ditto]

But I've also always saud that I understand why the South did what it did, and did what it felt it had to do.

Why was that?

[LexBaird]

You posit a straw man argument, which is a favorite of liberals. I expected as much.

I posited an analogy, followed by a satire of one of your ridiculous comments. If you are gonna slap a liberal label on anyone who disagrees with your revisionist spin on 140 year old history, you've got a problem.

Did I hurt your tender sensibilities? Why don't you put some ice on that?

[WhiskeyPapa]

Did I hurt your tender sensibilities? Why don't you put some ice on that?

You seem a fast learner. ;-)

Walt

[LexBaird]

but he had the sworn duty, as President, to preserve the Nation.

He had the sworn duty to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.

And how would the dissolution of the Nation have fufilled this charge? The Nation is a construct of the Constitution, formed by it when the States ratified it. Any attempt to sunder the Nation may clearly be seen as an attack on that Constitution.

[WhiskeyPapa]

He had the sworn duty to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.

"In his final message to Congress, on December 3, 1860, James Buchanan surprised some of his southern allies with a firm denial of the right of secession. The Union was not "a mere voluntary association of states, to be dissolved at pleasure by any one of the contracting parties," said Buchanan. "We the People" had adopted the Constitution to form "a more perfect Union" than the one existing under the Articles of Confederation, which had stated that "the Union shall be perpetual." The framers of the National Government "never intended to implant in its bosom the seeds of its own destruction, nor were they guilty of the absurdity of providing for its own dissolution." State Sovereignty was NOT superior to national sovereignty, Buchanan insisted. The Constitution bestowed the highest attributes of sovereignty exclusively on the federal government: national defense; foreign policy; regulation of foreign and interstate commerece; coinage of money. "This Constitution," stated the document, and the laws of the United States...shall be the supreme law of the land...anything in the constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding."

"BattleCry of Freedom", McPherson, p. 246

Walt

[wardaddy]

Treason...damn that word is tossed about as readily as racism or sexism or homophobia or anti-semitic these days.

I thought treason was "betrayal of one's country to the enemy"

Don't blame me, take it up with Mr Webster and Miss New World.

[stainlessbanner]

LB, which came first, the nation (I think you mean Republic) or the Constitution?

[stainlessbanner]

< Cut-and-paste shields activated >

[Outlaw76]

"I just want to know when we are going to celebrate White History Month, when there will be a box labled "European-American" to check on my drivers license application, and when can I expect my reparations check from the government for killing many of my German ancestors? "

Yeah! and what about my Irish Ancestors, didn't anyone watch 'Gangs of New York' and 'Far and Away'?

[BureaucratusMaximus]

There is hostility from both sides because there are no easy answers...

I disagree...the answers ARE easy, but no one has the nads to implement them. They all can be summarized by:

People do NOT appreciate what they do not work for

Life's is unfair sometimes...deal with it

Don't live in the past

You are capable of making your own decisions, dont enslave yourself

and naturally, end social welfare/entitlements/AA/abortion(whose "founder" really hated blacks and wished to use abortion as a way of exterminating them) and public education

That all sounds like basic common sense to me.

[Outlaw76]

"However, being that we had Jim Crow laws and segregation for such a long time, I do see a need for some type of affirmative action. I would prefer, however, that it be phased out as soon as possible so that all persons have equal access and opportunity in education... I do think equal access to education is the silver bullet to so many of our social problems...

The greatest problem comes from the underlined portion of this sentence. Who determines when enough is enough? The only end I can see to it is when people with lighter skin revolt. That would be most unfortunate and would land us back in 1959(or earlier) faster than you could shake a stick. The cost in lives would be horrendous. Too many people think something like that can't or won't happen. I think it will be inevitable. It’s funny how many see the Americans with Eurocentric origins as timid and mild. History tells a different story.

For every worthy student who is unable to attend college because of the color of his skin another racist is born. Color should not ever be a consideration and race should be removed from all government and public forms now. The danger is too great to let it continue. The very programs they call ‘Affirmative Action’ act to affirm certain racist ideologies – both black and white.

Never forget the dream. “…judged not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character…”

[dwd1]

I can agree with everything you said but as you stated,

"Life is unfair. Deal with it"

If you have never needed unemployment, medicaid, social security, a loan, then I salute you. For some reason, (and if you like blame it on the liberals) we try to help people that need help...And me personally, each time I was working in downtown LA(making 100K+) and saw the homeless, I always said "There, but for the Grace of God, go I".

I am sure that you know about the Great Depression. Hoover was voted out because the people in this country needed help and leadership and felt he could not provide it. They also felt he had no empathy or sympathy for their situation. Sometimes, things may look a little different from 1600 Pennsylvania than from 622 West Second in Littlefield, TX. I think as a society, we learned during the Great Depression to pull together to solve problems. I don't think Government is always the answer but from what I have heard, people legitimately needed help. There will always be people who try to cheat the system...You see it on Wall Street, you see it in Texas at the Former Enron Building and you are going to see it in South Central Los Angeles in the projects...


Public education...We may have problems in this country but you are going to have a little trouble convincing me that we are better off without public education... If you can send your kids to public school, God Bless you, but I don't know if I want to end up with well educated, well dressed children that have to have a body guard accompany them to the mall to protect them from the kids that have no education and no hope for a better future. (or do you think that we should convert to that caste system they use in India?)

These are the prices we pay for having a country that has problems but we are doing better than just about everybody else.

By the way, how do you legislate people appreciating what they work for, dealing with and accepting perceived unfairness (no more civil litigation), not living in the past (outlaw history classes and speaking about anything that happened before 1964), require all persons to make their own decisions and take responsibility for their actions (outlaw guidance counselors, parenting, peer pressure, social pressure)

These easy answers sound more like moral objectives which I believe in personally but believe you might have a little trouble enforcing on a population of 250M people...

The Taliban tried to impose moral objectives...At one time, the Catholic Church, the Puritans, the Fascists, the Nazis, and the feminists..All have tried to impose moral objectives......It did not go well...

The only community I can think of who has been able to successfully live with the objectives you speak of would be the Amish...

You can say "don't live in the past"... I am just making sure that you don't mean "It never happened!" versus "We need to learn from the past, not repeat it, and make the future better!"

I have no need to bring up the past every time the present gets tough, but last time I checked, most people make decisions based on their experience (I have not stuck my hand in the fire in quite some time)

[Classicaliberalconservative]

Thank you for your points. I agreed with many of them. Some on this forum think that racism against minority groups and bad race relations between whites and minorities or even between two different minority proups is no problem at all anymore. This is far from the case. However, racial hostility is no reason to have a victim mentality when the US is a land of som many good people and much opportunity.

[BureaucratusMaximus]

By the way, how do you legislate people appreciating what they work for, dealing with and accepting perceived unfairness (no more civil litigation), not living in the past (outlaw history classes and speaking about anything that happened before 1964), require all persons to make their own decisions and take responsibility for their actions (outlaw guidance counselors, parenting, peer pressure, social pressure)

By eliminating entitlements.

[dwd1]

Never forget the dream. “…judged not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character…”

At least concede that it is still just a dream. And the real question is this? Let us say that we end affirmative action on next Friday. Would someone who is willing to commit violence for personal gain and not feel that all persons should be judged by the content of their character, can we trust that they will "do the right thing" and live the dream that you mention or would they go back to discriminating at every opportunity (or perhaps simply hide it better)? In other words, can we trust you?

If you look at our society, the equal protection law has been around for quite some time. Do you believe that we can eliminate all legislation that has resulted from the the acts of persons who (for some strange reason) do not believe in equal opportunity and protection under the law.


The cost in lives would be horrendous. Too many people think something like that can't or won't happen. I think it will be inevitable. It’s funny how many see the Americans with Eurocentric origins as timid and mild. History tells a different story.

For every worthy student who is unable to attend college because of the color of his skin another racist is born. Color should not ever be a consideration and race should be removed from all government and public forms now. The danger is too great to let it continue. The very programs they call ‘Affirmative Action’ act to affirm certain racist ideologies – both black and white.

When you speak of this, it reminds me of my time in the military where we were required to do things that we did not agree because the instructions were given by someone who has the legal authority to do so...
I think that we should have a law concerning speed traps but it is not up to me. I still have to follow the law or risk losing my life or my freedom or my property. I do not agree with the law but I follow it.
Are you taking the position that though affirmative action is the law, you are willing to violently oppose it or are you stating that there are others (not you, of course) that feel as if a race war is going to result from affirmative action?

[dwd1]

Well, I feel that as long as we can have a fair minded discussion about it, we will get it squared away at some point...

Thank you for the reply...

BTW, if you ever run into a victim, remind them that this is a country where a hand-up(not a hand out) can always be found if one puts in the effort...