Commandant of the Marine Corps bans all Confederate symbols

[Weezer]

I think I'll stick to the football and NCAA portions of the site going forward.

@Grand Vol was a quitter too. Are you sure you're not him?

 

[Mick]

@Grand Vol was a quitter too. Are you sure you're not him?

Brutal. I wish him well and both posters are probably better off not hanging out in the under belly of VN.

 

[Only_1_OK]

Boy, you Vol fans aren't real swift about picking up sarcasm are you?

 

[ETV]

Boy, you Vol fans aren't real swift about picking up sarcasm are you?

There's this joke about when and when not to use blue font.

 

[Only_1_OK]

Maybe they thought common sense would prevail, and that it wouldn't resort to bloodshed. They did advocate for government "for the people, by the people". They understood the value of self governance. In no way do I think they would have wanted the Union split, but if things couldn't have been solved diplomatically, I'm not convinced they would have fought a war. The FFs worked together to compromise, for the betterment of all. They didn't act with an iron fist in the way Lincoln did.

I think you've misunderstood where I stand on the matter. I'm no fan of Lincoln or the iron fist as you say he ran the country with. One thing is for certain, we no longer were the united States after the war, but became the United States with a far more powerful central government than I believe some of the founding fathers wanted. The idea of our more perfect union had a glaring oversight by the founding fathers. The point was they gave the plan of how to get in, but not to get out because at the time, nobody wanted out. I mean, it took a lot to get some in, but its like they forgot to tell people they could get out if the old one wasn't working any longer.

 

[GAVol]

Brutal. I wish him well and both posters are probably better off not hanging out in the under belly of VN.

They always come back.

 

[AM64]

Have you ever been in the military? If they say to drop and give them 20, you better drop and give them twenty. If they say get rid of that crap, you better get rid of that crap. This has nothing to do with you family history or stripping "you" of "your" rights.

Yeah, I've been in the military. Almost every generation in my family has. I'm not claiming the military doesn't have the right to set limits on base; they do. My point is that those actions were driven by the political correctness of the day - set by people who've never served in the military or in any official capacity, and the Marine Corps Commandant caved to the liberal demands of the day. Liberal policy is nothing more than mob rule pushing their beliefs like playground bullies always have, and unfortunately it ends in appeasement for sanity's sake - just the way over stressed parents respond to a toddler with a temper tantrum without further public embarrassment because a swat to the backside is abusive today. So here's a question. If the military has absolute control as you point out above, the why would the military be under any pressure whatsoever to rename a base?

If political correctness limits what we may say and think without being "racist" or "deplorable", if acts can be hate crimes when propagated against some people but not others, then, yes, that means rights are taken. One thing that never fails to amaze me is how those wonderful liberal people who rave about equality and peace and brotherhood, are the most tyrannical and bigoted people on the face of the earth. We're either equal in what we may say, write, think, or display or we aren't equal at all.

 

[AM64]

I think I'll stick to the football and NCAA portions of the site going forward.

Warning: it actually gets crazier over in the football forum.

 

[AM64]

I think you've misunderstood where I stand on the matter. I'm no fan of Lincoln or the iron fist as you say he ran the country with. One thing is for certain, we no longer were the united States after the war, but became the United States with a far more powerful central government than I believe some of the founding fathers wanted. The idea of our more perfect union had a glaring oversight by the founding fathers. The point was they gave the plan of how to get in, but not to get out because at the time, nobody wanted out. I mean, it took a lot to get some in, but its like they forgot to tell people they could get out if the old one wasn't working any longer.

I think the bigger issue was that they didn't fully appreciate how those in power seek more - that there can never be enough. That "all other things" were left to the states was a firewall ... the attempt to protect against federalism. The move obviously failed.

 

[Carl Pickens]

Hypothetical question. Since the US fought a war against the CSA, they would be considered an enemy, right?

Would it be acceptable to have Union Jack symbols? Rising Sun? Mexican flags? Red, Black and Green flag?

This is too deep to ponder

 

[NCFisher]

That's actually a great question. The founders presented their case for independence. As I recall it wasn't built on slavery.

The History is written. If the south had won, they would have the spoils of victory.
The colonies won.

To be accurate, the history is being written. Though other works have preceded it, "Complicity: How the North Promoted, Prolonged, and Profited from Slavery", shows how little of the history to date is accurate or generally known. That is took nearly 150 years to be written demonstrates the how deep the falsification of the 'history' runs, how pervasive the mythology, and that it has been purposeful. There is no further excuse for a national ignorance.

For those not interested enough to read a book, a well-researched and referenced historical primer is found at http://slavenorth.com and covers a lot of ground in short space. It is the minimum read for understanding the history of American slavery.

 

[ajvol01]

There are many places where the Stars and Stripes can no longer be displayed or the pledge of allegiance no longer recited because they may offend someone but you know that already.

Why are you bringing up the Democratic debates? I think there’s already another thread for that

 

[NCFisher]

I think the bigger issue was that they didn't fully appreciate how those in power seek more - that there can never be enough. That "all other things" were left to the states was a firewall ... the attempt to protect against federalism. The move obviously failed.

They were students of every form of governance preceding them, from the corruption and fall of the Roman empire to their England. I think they understood full well that no statute can protect liberty from the very government that would take it and is the basis of the 2nd and 10th amendments. With clarity, they understood that no constitutional construct would protect liberty if the desire of the people to protect it does not exist.

As Franklin remarked upon being asked what form of government shall we have "A Republic, if you can keep it".

 

[NCFisher]

View attachment 263656

But U.S. congressman Lincoln did say that in 1848.
President Lincoln deleted the tweet in March of 1861.

 

[DynaLo]

It’s all confederate sympathizers have.

You do realize that the original Confederate sympathizers are a lot of the same families that fought against the British for the freedom of self government, right?

You also know that the land grants received from the Federal Government by those Revolutionary War Veterans are what moved those Colonial families into the Southern Territories and they moved their slaves with them, right?

You surely know that the bulk of the Confederate soldiers didn’t muster up until after seeing the complete devastation and destruction inflicted in their home states by the initial 75,000 Union invaders sent by Lincoln to forcibly reunite the states for economic purposes, right?

The tone of Southern disdain in your posts is palpable and begs the question of why you’re even a fan of a college that resides in a Southern State that once supported and joined the Confederacy...

Isn’t there some damn Yankee school that you find more palatable to attach your fandom to considering your abhorrence of pride in southern heritage?

 

[Mick]

Yeah, I've been in the military. Almost every generation in my family has. I'm not claiming the military doesn't have the right to set limits on base; they do. My point is that those actions were driven by the political correctness of the day - set by people who've never served in the military or in any official capacity, and the Marine Corps Commandant caved to the liberal demands of the day. Liberal policy is nothing more than mob rule pushing their beliefs like playground bullies always have, and unfortunately it ends in appeasement for sanity's sake - just the way over stressed parents respond to a toddler with a temper tantrum without further public embarrassment because a swat to the backside is abusive today. So here's a question. If the military has absolute control as you point out above, the why would the military be under any pressure whatsoever to rename a base?

If political correctness limits what we may say and think without being "racist" or "deplorable", if acts can be hate crimes when propagated against some people but not others, then, yes, that means rights are taken. One thing that never fails to amaze me is how those wonderful liberal people who rave about equality and peace and brotherhood, are the most tyrannical and bigoted people on the face of the earth. We're either equal in what we may say, write, think, or display or we aren't equal at all.

Which rights have been taken from you?

 

[tvolsfan]

You do realize that the original Confederate sympathizers are a lot of the same families that fought against the British for the freedom of self government, right?

You also know that the land grants received from the Federal Government by those Revolutionary War Veterans are what moved those Colonial families into the Southern Territories and they moved their slaves with them, right?

You surely know that the bulk of the Confederate soldiers didn’t muster up until after seeing the complete devastation and destruction inflicted in their home states by the initial 75,000 Union invaders sent by Lincoln to forcibly reunite the states for economic purposes, right?

The tone of Southern disdain in your posts is palpable and begs the question of why you’re even a fan of a college that resides in a Southern State that once supported and joined the Confederacy...

Isn’t there some damn Yankee school that you find more palatable to attach your fandom to considering your abhorrence of pride in southern heritage?

This post is especially silly when you consider that East Tennessee was pro-Union.

 

[hog88]

I think the bigger issue was that they didn't fully appreciate how those in power seek more - that there can never be enough. That "all other things" were left to the states was a firewall ... the attempt to protect against federalism. The move obviously failed.

Oh I think they knew how elected people would seek more and more power, what they failed to take into consideration is the citizens willingness to let them have it.

 

[carlos86]

To be accurate, the history is being written. Though other works have preceded it, "Complicity: How the North Promoted, Prolonged, and Profited from Slavery", shows how little of the history to date is accurate or generally known. That is took nearly 150 years to be written demonstrates the how deep the falsification of the 'history' runs, how pervasive the mythology, and that it has been purposeful. There is no further excuse for a national ignorance.

For those not interested enough to read a book, a well-researched and referenced historical primer is found at http://slavenorth.com and covers a lot of ground in short space. It is the minimum read for understanding the history of American slavery.

This is a site that supports “Lost Cause” theories. Come on now.

 

[NCFisher]

This is a site that supports “Lost Cause” theories. Come on now.

You've just made a claim you can't back up because it does not do so, in the least. Back it up or retract., thanks.

 

[tvolsfan]

You've just made a claim you can't back up because it does not do so, in the least. Back it up or retract., thanks.

Right, I’m sure ”slave north” provides a pretty nuanced, unbiased view.

 

[NCFisher]

Right, I’m sure ”slave north” provides a pretty nuanced, unbiased view.

People like you are the problem. You're handed bite-sized historical accounts of slavery in the North, the role the region played in the translatlantic trade, the proliferation of slavery in the country, and the black codes enacted to prevent freed slaves from settling north, and your response is "Not opening my mouth; prefer to not know and instead speak from ignorance". What it must be like to live life subjectively.

So, same challenge to you; demonstrate the bias or shut-up. You can formulate an argument, right?

 

[Roustabout]

To be accurate, the history is being written. Though other works have preceded it, "Complicity: How the North Promoted, Prolonged, and Profited from Slavery", shows how little of the history to date is accurate or generally known. That is took nearly 150 years to be written demonstrates the how deep the falsification of the 'history' runs, how pervasive the mythology, and that it has been purposeful. There is no further excuse for a national ignorance.

For those not interested enough to read a book, a well-researched and referenced historical primer is found at http://slavenorth.com and covers a lot of ground in short space. It is the minimum read for understanding the history of American slavery.

You keep trying to move the goalposts. I have no debate about the complicity of folks in the north.
To say that blacks (regarding the confederate flag) juts need to get over it, or get edemucated is bull shat. The point about the Nazi flag couldn’t have driven it home more.

I’ve actually read a lot on the subject. You should read some of the stuff on the sisters of the confederacy.

 

[NCFisher]

You keep trying to move the goalposts. I have no debate about the complicity of folks in the north.
To say that blacks (regarding the confederate flag) juts need to get over it, or get edemucated is bull shat. The point about the Nazi flag couldn’t have driven it home more.

I’ve actually read a lot on the subject. You should read some of the stuff on the sisters of the confederacy.

I'm moving nothing, but rather clearly demonstrating slavery was a national scourge and shame, that Southerners are tired of being fired upon over it. If we're to draw analogies with the Nazi flag/symbols, surely we must impugn our national flag and state flags throughout 31 states that protected the slave trading ships, the entire judicial system and legislature that birthed and enforced slavery, and public edifice built with much slave labor including the White House.

That's the conundrum and where the logic, even today, is taking us. Aside from the impracticality, is the danger in allowing ignorance to inform and direct us. So, yes; again - inform the ignorant instead of succumbing to them, whatever the basis of the ignorance. Emotion makes shite policy.

In fact, I think it was you I directed to the NPR/Marist poll showing not even a majority of black Americans supported removal of Confederate memorial. So, why do you attempt to speak for them, lump them monolithically, or attempt to convince them they should share your outrage?

 

[AM64]

You do realize that the original Confederate sympathizers are a lot of the same families that fought against the British for the freedom of self government, right?

You also know that the land grants received from the Federal Government by those Revolutionary War Veterans are what moved those Colonial families into the Southern Territories and they moved their slaves with them, right?

You surely know that the bulk of the Confederate soldiers didn’t muster up until after seeing the complete devastation and destruction inflicted in their home states by the initial 75,000 Union invaders sent by Lincoln to forcibly reunite the states for economic purposes, right?

The tone of Southern disdain in your posts is palpable and begs the question of why you’re even a fan of a college that resides in a Southern State that once supported and joined the Confederacy...

Isn’t there some damn Yankee school that you find more palatable to attach your fandom to considering your abhorrence of pride in southern heritage?

Kenneth Roberts in his book The Battle of Cowpens Stated that the Revolutionary War set the stage for the Civil War, but he didn't expand on that which was a real shame. One thing about it, though; the British made a real blunder with the southern campaign ... those people knew how to fight a lot better than the New England bunch. The British may not have been winning in the northern colonies, but it's hard to say they were completely losing either. When the British riled up the folks in the Carolinas, they got their butts kicked up around their ears.