2020 Presidential Race

Following orders from Congress...

In May 1863, the Confederate Congress outlawed all officers and men of the United States’ Colored Troops, ordering the execution of their officers and the turning over of the enlisted men to the states, to be tried as armed slaves (and then, of course, executed).
Not an excuse. And not one he used so you probably want to try again. I was just following ordered doesn’t hold water in many circumstances.
 
Not an excuse. And not one he used so you probably want to try again. I was just following ordered doesn’t hold water in many circumstances.

Who made an excuse? I just pointed out that it was a law passed a year prior to Fort Pillow.

Good to know just following orders doesn't hold water..that puts the WWII atrocities committed in invaded countries squarely on the heads of each and every German soldier that committed them and not on any orders from Adolf they were following.
 
Their perspective was one of former slaves having escaped and taken up arms against former masters. Different time, different views. Not one of us today lived in that world and could identify with that thought process. You can't judge the past by today's standards. That little quote "judge not lest you be judged" takes on a whole new meaning if your actions today are reconsidered 50 or 100 or more years from now ... you live today and have no idea what future generations will conclude about today's standards.
This point sails over the heads of people who are young. They aren't taught to put things in historical perspective.
 
1. It didn’t just apply to former slaves.
2. That’s still an incredibly backwards perspective, regardless of the time.

1. From their perspective, what black person wasn't a slave?
2. Today, dangerous pets who turn on people are frequently killed? Do you think in 50 years if there's a commonly used different way, they will consider us backwards?

I'm not a very religious person, so I don't claim in depth knowledge about religious history, but if you look at the ten commandments ... the one about coveting the neighbor's man servant and maid servant. The wording implies and scholars seem to agree those are considered slaves. We don't believe in slavery here in the US today, but slavery has a very very long history of acceptance by the human race.
 
  • Like
Reactions: W.TN.Orange Blood
Not one of us today lived in that world and could identify with that thought process. You can't judge the past by today's standards. That little quote "judge not lest you be judged" takes on a whole new meaning if your actions today are reconsidered 50 or 100 or more years from now ... you live today and have no idea what future generations will conclude about today's standards.
I agree. That's why I'm all for statues of historical figures (Thomas Jefferson, for examples) in spite of views and actions we would consider unseemly today. What I'm not for is glorifying people for those unseemly traits.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
1. From their perspective, what black person wasn't a slave?
2. Today, dangerous pets who turn on people are frequently killed? Do you think in 50 years if there's a commonly used different way, they will consider us backwards?

You seem to be supporting (or at the very least, not contradicting) my argument that the confederacy was based on white supremacy.
 
I agree. That's why I'm all for statues of historical figures (Thomas Jefferson, for examples) in spite of views and actions we would consider unseemly today. What I'm not for is glorifying people for those unseemly traits.
Have you ever toured Monticello and seen the absolute greatness of Thomas Jefferson? He was quite the man.
 
I agree. That's why I'm all for statues of historical figures (Thomas Jefferson, for examples) in spite of views and actions we would consider unseemly today. What I'm not for is glorifying people for those unseemly traits.

I understand, and I'm trying to make the point that "acceptable" and "unseemly" can change over a period of years. We can't change that, and it's wrong to judge the past by standards that didn't apply then. It is the big problem I have with respect to revisionism and liberal reinterpretation of history.
 
Articles of Indenture were the precursor to full blown slavery and if folks researched it they would likely find an ancestor with signed Articles.

Most folks signed Articles with a ship's captain in exchange for passage and upon arrival here those Articles were then sold to colonists. One could only hope for a kind master to buy them while they served out their terms. Many were bought to work in the fields of land owners and many died before their terms were finished. The numbers of folks coming over under Articles were not sufficient to cover the necessary field hand numbers and land owners then turned to the purchase of Africans from ship's captains.

History also notes that some of the first blacks here came under Articles of Indenture.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
Who made an excuse? I just pointed out that it was a law passed a year prior to Fort Pillow.

Good to know just following orders doesn't hold water..that puts the WWII atrocities committed in invaded countries squarely on the heads of each and every German soldier that committed them and not on any orders from Adolf they were following.
How many Nazi Generals did we allow to say they were just following orders?
 
  • Like
Reactions: tvolsfan
It's still up, I'm sure. That is a big tourist attraction, and it is in an old cemetery with a thousand other dead people.
All the more incentive for the lunatics to tear it down.

There is a smaller graveyard in Virginia where a lot of my Dad's people are buried I'd like to visit some day too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
Advertisement





Back
Top