Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'History Forum' started by LadyEagle, Nov 20, 2003.
The rest of this piece
Your historian would have a tad bit more credibility is he didn't offer this in his statement of faith:
TRUTH IN HISTORY STATEMENT OF FAITH
Ten years before the war would be in the 1850's - did "communists, socialists [and] Red Republicans" have any prominence in the US back then?
TRUTH IN HISTORY STATEMENT OF FAITH </font>[/QUOTE]The rightists here often say that liberals accuse them of bigotry. Links such as that (to a site that proclaims that racial mixing leads to the downfall of great nations) kinda lends credence to the claim (which I have not actually seen made, but after seeing that site, I'm somewhat tempted to make).
Boy, I have nothing good to say about Yankee unitarian social-reconstruction abolitionists.
But man, I want to distance myself from the OTHER extreme for certain sure!!
Where did you find that on the site, Daisy? I didn't see anything about "race mixing" on there. Did they say that?
It is not inconceivable that "socialist" and "communist" could show up in antebelllum literature; after the European revolutions of 1848, those ideologies were active. The Communist Manifesto was published in 1848.
However, the provenance that I could find for this quotation is from Fifteen Ministers, a seriously flawed group that, apparently, espouses the worst forms of Christian reconstructionism.
Here's a link to an analysis of the "movement":
THE U.S. CIVIL WAR AS A THEOLOGICAL WAR
My inclination is that this fellow belongs in the theology forum (or other religions), not the history forum.
It's not blatantly in the SOF, but you can find it elsewhere:
RACIAL INTEGRATION AND AMERICA'S SOCIAL UPHEAVAL
Spot a trend here?
Nice link, rsr. (Will take some time to read, but will read later)
But can we get past that portion of the "statement of faith" (which I did not post)and move on to the theme in the original post?
PS: If Dr. Bob chooses to move this thread, I'm game, LOL.
I wasn't really suggesting moving the thread; it's just that this guy is totally without credibility on any historical issue, so it's hard to start a discussion on his rantings.
So, ignoring his bilge, what is the question we should be talking about?
Nah, We'll keep it here! We need a good debate on slavery every week or so to liven things up.
But why not start a thread on "rewriting history" and keep that here too?
Yes, I'm not making it up. Same site, different page
I hope I'm not breaking the rules by posting the following quotation. I'm sure the administrators of this board do NOT agree with the administrators of that board. I'm posting this as an example of bigotry found there.
There are other pages at that site with the same attitude, but this seems to be the most blatant.
This stuff was not on the particular page you posted. I don't think you'd have posted the link to the site had you known what the other pages were like. From what I've read of your posts, I don't believe you're like that.
Next time I want to argue about the Civil War, I'll check out the site better.
(Can't even expect any of my fellow Dixie compatriots to help me out of this one, LOL!)
Rule One: There are *no* objective accounts of the history of the US in regards to Slavery and the Civil War. Period.
Try as we might our society is simply too color conscious to be objective.
The best we can do is that once someone identifies themselves as a Christian is to treat them like a fellow believer, esteeming them as better than oneself.
The south was rightfully squashed like the cockroaches they were.
Little known historical fact:
Lincoln sent a messenger to Lee and said, "Don't make me open a can."
Lee responded in a return message, "Try me."
Lincoln responded with the Union army.
Lee responded by leading one of the greatest failures in history.
GRANT! GRANT! GRANT! GRANT!
For truth, for justice, for freedom, for unity!
If you *really* want a Grant, you'll have to apply at the appropriate office.
Did I hear the word "grants?"
Here's a site where you can get free government grants:
This should keep everyone happy, LOL.
It gets even worse: look at this:
So the races are different KINDS? We condemn evolutionists for erring on what a "kind" is (and often racism has been blamed on evolutionism as teaching certain races wer lower species, but we see its real origin is this assumption). And this site says the issue was Christianity vs. atheism?
I was wondering when there would be a new "slavery" thread. It's been a while...
Good, you bumped this up. Unfortunately, the great points on the link were overshadowed by some of their theology.
No one, however, has proven any of their historical points wrong, it is to be noted.
And the brave souls of the South were NOT cockroaches, I might add.
Wouldn't it be nice to have an adult discussion on the merits of the original link? Fat chance.