Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Issues > Social Issues

Social Issues Social Issues and Problems - Social issues, social ill, social problems


Thanks Tree102Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old June 4th, 2017, 03:30 PM   #71
RNG
Senior Member
 
RNG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: LA LA Land North
Posts: 25,825
The point I am making, and it is in fact more of a condemnation of the south's morals, is that they weren't fighting to maintain the institution of slavery as some type of theoretical right, it was more analogous to had the government threatened to confiscate their tractors in another age.

But I fear this might be nothing more than a semantics discussion now.
RNG is offline  
Old June 4th, 2017, 06:53 PM   #72
Senior Member
 
Asimov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,710
Aside from all the bantering, let's return to the original question. The answer, from the perspective of one who teaches history at the collegiate level, is that ALL history is revisionist, ie. it is the creation of historians. The facts don't generally change, though they may be amended in light of new discoveries, but the interpretation of those facts is the designated purview and duty of enlightened historians. It is their birthright. It is NOT the realm, nor should it be, of the passionately uninformed.

Removing a statue of Robert E. Lee because of his benevolent attitude toward the enslavement of a race of people does not change anything about the man himself. It simply chooses (and historians have the right to choose) not to exemplify what he stood for in his defense of the Confederacy. It does not vilify the man, it simply ceases to erroneously glorify him as a defender of the Constitution and the values we claim to treasure as a people. At the very least perhaps it makes us appear a little less hypocritical in the eyes of the world.
Thanks from Clara007 and deGanis
Asimov is offline  
Old June 4th, 2017, 08:03 PM   #73
Commie Exposer
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Blefuscu
Posts: 38,895
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bookworm View Post
But wouldn't the initial presentation of history also be reflecting an ideology? Consider the monuments to Civil war generals. Why have a monument to someone if not to present that someone as a person to be remembered favorably throughout time? Every time you look at that monument, you are being forced to remember the honor that was bestowed upon that individual.

Adding context to the individual might tell us whether that individual is worthy of being remembered favorably. Consider a hypothetical memorial built to honor a firefighter who rescued 15 people from a fire. Years later, it is discovered that that firefighter was an arsonist. Should his memorial stay up? After all, he DID rescue 15 people, so his history in that particular incident was one of being a hero. But we also know more about him as a person, so our present knowledge in going to play a big factor in whether we continue to honor him with a monument. SHOULD our present knowledge be a factor, or should we just keep honoring all individuals that people in the past have decided to honor in spite of further added context?
Regarding the firefighter analogy, nothing has been added over time to Lee or Davis's background to lesson their character, which were more admirable than Lincoln's.

There always needs to be a delineation between present knowledge and presentism.
Jimmyb is offline  
Old June 4th, 2017, 08:08 PM   #74
Commie Exposer
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Blefuscu
Posts: 38,895
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bookworm View Post
I see you didn't like the way de Ganis asked this question, but I'm also interested in the answer. Were there any secession issues which did not have a slavery component to them?
Arturius' question was a combination of insolence and cookie-cutter, pre-packaged history.

Slavery was not the issue for the sake of slavery. Read for example Georgia's reason for secession. It is much richer than just slavery: link
Jimmyb is offline  
Old June 4th, 2017, 08:13 PM   #75
Commie Exposer
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Blefuscu
Posts: 38,895
Thanks from Sabcat and Fargo
Jimmyb is offline  
Old June 4th, 2017, 09:10 PM   #76
Senior Member
 
Bookworm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,718
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asimov View Post
The facts don't generally change, though they may be amended in light of new discoveries, but the interpretation of those facts is the designated purview and duty of enlightened historians. It is their birthright. It is NOT the realm, nor should it be, of the passionately uninformed.
So what makes someone an "enlightened historian"? I enjoy learning about history. I can even call myself a "history buff." Do I have to have some professional job related to history, such as a teacher or archaeologist, as well as have some training from progressive educational institutions, in order to be an "enlightened historian"?
Bookworm is offline  
Old June 4th, 2017, 09:35 PM   #77
Senior Member
 
Bookworm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,718
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmyb View Post
Slavery was not the issue for the sake of slavery. Read for example Georgia's reason for secession. It is much richer than just slavery: link
That was quite a long read. The first paragraph contained some statements that didn't have to do with slavery, but the whole rest of the document was statement after statement castigating the government for not upholding the expansion of slavery into the territories and for being hostile to slavery everywhere. What is the "much richer" segment you are referring to? All I see is a defense of their desire to maintain and spread their institution of slavery.
Thanks from right to left and deGanis
Bookworm is offline  
Old June 4th, 2017, 09:37 PM   #78
Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Logres
Posts: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmyb View Post
Arturius' question was a combination of insolence and cookie-cutter, pre-packaged history.

Slavery was not the issue for the sake of slavery. Read for example Georgia's reason for secession. It is much richer than just slavery: link
I can't quite work out if you are levelling 'insolence' and 'cookie-cutter, pre-packaged history' at me. If you did mean me, I didn't wish to be insolent and don't believe I was being - I would suggest you try the same. As for 'cookie-cutter history', I have no need to justify my credentials to you; let me just say you are way off.

Once again, thank you for proving my point. Even a cursory scan of the document reveals the fundamental disagreement and cause of secession emirates from slavery.

Again, please provide evidence that slavery wasn't the principle cause


Once
deGanis is offline  
Old June 4th, 2017, 09:40 PM   #79
Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Logres
Posts: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmyb View Post
Simplistic nonsense - I thought you would be able to provide a better argument - or maybe just an argument
Thanks from RNG
deGanis is offline  
Old June 4th, 2017, 09:50 PM   #80
Commie Exposer
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Blefuscu
Posts: 38,895
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bookworm View Post
That was quite a long read. The first paragraph contained some statements that didn't have to do with slavery, but the whole rest of the document was statement after statement castigating the government for not upholding the expansion of slavery into the territories and for being hostile to slavery everywhere. What is the "much richer" segment you are referring to? All I see is a defense of their desire to maintain and spread their institution of slavery.
The document regarded the Constitution. Coal, tractors, wages, or any other method of producing, manufacturing, industry, etc. could be substituted for slavery.
Jimmyb is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Issues > Social Issues

Tags
history, rewriting



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Democrats rewriting history webguy4 Asia 1 July 25th, 2016 11:18 AM
Indiana: Discriminating Against Gays, Religious Freedom, Rewriting the Constitution LongWinded Current Events 108 April 2nd, 2015 06:04 PM
History of Man Jimmyb Current Events 8 June 30th, 2014 12:41 AM
This Day In History Cubbie World History 146 October 2nd, 2009 09:05 AM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.