AM I THE ONLY ONE?

[Spike elk]

Great for some. That much is very true. A real constitutionalist and Christian won't be satisfied until it's great for all Americans.

Impossible. It will never be great for all Americans. We all have the same opportunity but not everyone is willing to get off their ass and make life great for themselves. It sounds like you are waiting for AOC and Bernie to step in with their socialism communist bullshiz and make life equitable for everyone. Just look at the shitstorm that is every liberal city. I guess that when the entire country is like that it will be great for everyone?

 

[Poser]

I dont really disagree with anything in your post. However, that does not address the real issues at play today. Blaming ones plight today on symbolism of 200 year old history is just as logical as marching to defund the police while ignoring source of crime and violence that brought the police into the community in the first place. This is about spite and deflection of responsibility, plain and simple.

I don’t agree with the “defund the police” trend in anyway. If anything, I’d argue more funding for more training. I heard a Jocko Willink comment that, ideally 1/3rd of law enforcement’s time would be spent training. If you applied that thought process to law enforcement, they would spend 4 months out of the year dedicated to nothing but training. That’s probably unrealistic, but more budget = more training time. Cops handle complex and fluid situations so It would not be unreasonable to expect the same commitment to a training timetable that the military practices, rotating in and out of “street deployments” and training for those “deployments.”

As for the statues, I suppose my argument is more based in the “is there actually a defensible rationale for their contextual placement?” Realm. If you frame it in the larger context of society trends and movements, I still find confederate statues to be the wrong “line in the sand” to choose.

 

[CorbLand]

The funny thing with terms like "liberal" and "conservative" is that their meaning changes over time. At one time, not that long ago, the people that signed their names on the bottom of the Constitution were considered liberal in their beliefs. The idea that people could govern themselves was a liberal belief but now, in todays terms, they are considered conservative.

The problem with terms like "liberal" and "conservatives" is that they are used to lump people into groups but they don't have true parameters. I believe that taxation is theft, printers should go brrrr making gun parts, gay people should be able to get married, and people should be able to grow pot in their garden....where do I fall in the "liberal" or "conservative" camp today and where would I have fallen with the same beliefs 15 years ago? If I told you two of those four things, how would it change what I am called or what camp I am in?

 

[Mudd Foot]

”

Victor Davis Hanson’s “A war like no other” examines how Athens ate itself from within and was ultimately defeated by Sparta. It’s relevant today because it’s leftist Athens vs right-wing Sparta. (Many social programs, comparable to those within our modern-day, were also put in place under the guise of compassion.)

Athen’s posture couldn’t be sustained because the 2500 year old learning lesson is that no civilization that has moved leftward survives without a totalitarian regime. Period. For those of you interested, it’s a great read, despite being from an honored academic; as Hanson adeptly weaves the history of Athen’s demise with examples of daily public and military life. Regardless, the cautionary tale, is that no civilization in recorded history has survived a concerted move to the left.

Aaron Lewis’ song strikes a cord with me because I’m 55 and was enlisted in the mid 1980’s. Our training was aimed at the Big Red Star. Communism was doomed and we KNEW it. We were proud to call ourselves Americans. We wept when the Miracle on Ice happened because our amateurs beat a national COMMUNIST professional team. 35 years on and numerous politicians, organizations, corporations, media outlets, EMBRACE it as if they know nothing of the 20th century’s 100 million corpses scattered by this failed totalitarian system.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[wind gypsy]

Why would you suggest they come down? Just curious.

I'm not an advocate that we go tearing down all the statues of people who did things in their time that we frown upon today.. That said, I damn sure can't see arguing for protecting any statues that were erected to celebrate people for their contributions in waging a war against the US over the right to own slaves.

 

[browning2480]

I'm not an advocate that we go tearing down all the statues of people who did things in their time that we frown upon today.. That said, I damn sure can't see arguing for protecting any statues that were erected to celebrate people for their contributions in waging a war against the US over the right to own slaves.

But the statue was put up for a specific reason. Does anyone know why the decision was made and who made it? You typically can’t just go around erecting your own statues on city/state property. At some point in history, a group of people agreed to put these up. If they are managed by the city, then a vote should be taken to have them taken down.

 

[Poser]

But the statue was put up for a specific reason. Does anyone know why the decision was made and who made it? You typically can’t just go around erecting your own statues on city/state property. At some point in history, a group of people agreed to put these up. If they are managed by the city, then a vote should be taken to have them taken down.

The decisions to erect them vary wildly from one statue to the next. If I recall correctly, The Nathan Bedford Forrest statue in Memphis was erected on NBF’s gravesite, privately owned at the time, with a city park established around it and eventually deeded to the city. Many of them were funded by the Sons and Daughter’s of the Confederacy groups respectively (or similar) and then gifted to cities. Sometimes the status property were on privately held property and transferred to public trust over time.

Found this history of the Lee statue in New Orleans:

*Efforts to raise funds to build the statue began after Lee's death in 1870 by the Robert E. Lee Monument Association, which by 1876 had raised the $36,400 needed. The association's president was Louisiana Supreme Court Justice Charles E. Fenner.[5] New York sculptor Alexander Doyle was hired to sculpt the brass statue, which was installed in 1884. The granite base and pedestal was designed and built by John Ray [Roy], architect; contract dated 1877, at a cost of $26,474. John Hagan, a builder, was contracted to "furnish and set" the column at a cost of $9,350.[6] The monument was dedicated in 1884, at Tivoli Circle (since commonly called Lee Circle) on St. Charles Avenue. Dignitaries present at the dedication on February 22—George Washington's birthday—included former Confederate President Jefferson Davis, two daughters of General Lee- Mary Custis Lee and Mildred Childe Lee, and Confederate General P.G.T. Beauregard.*

No mention of a voting process for erecting it. I looked through the history of the Richmond monuments and could not find any references to voting, only city planning surveys for the site. There is really no information on this that I can Seem to find. Some states enacted laws at the state level that removing historical statues requires a state level vote. Reading the history on them is pretty interesting, though. Most were erected between 1890 and the early 1950s. There is much implication of reinforcing Jim Crow era race laws and, later, backlash to the Civil Rights movement.

 

[wind gypsy]

But the statue was put up for a specific reason. Does anyone know why the decision was made and who made it? You typically can’t just go around erecting your own statues on city/state property. At some point in history, a group of people agreed to put these up. If they are managed by the city, then a vote should be taken to have them taken down.

Interesting points. I recall reading about this stuff before BLM and Antifa were a thing that suggested what Poser alludes to above: "There is much implication of reinforcing Jim Crow era race laws and, later, backlash to the Civil Rights movement". Who knows, maybe there were a bunch of people who were totally against slavery and loved black folks but just felt they really needed to celebrate the general who waged war against the US in the name of slavery with a statue.

 

[browning2480]

The decisions to erect them vary wildly from one statue to the next. If I recall correctly, The Nathan Bedford Forrest statue in Memphis was erected on NBF’s gravesite, privately owned at the time, with a city park established around it and eventually deeded to the city. Many of them were funded by the Sons and Daughter’s of the Confederacy groups respectively (or similar) and then gifted to cities. Sometimes the status property were on privately held property and transferred to public trust over time.

Found this history of the Lee statue in New Orleans:

*Efforts to raise funds to build the statue began after Lee's death in 1870 by the Robert E. Lee Monument Association, which by 1876 had raised the $36,400 needed. The association's president was Louisiana Supreme Court Justice Charles E. Fenner.[5] New York sculptor Alexander Doyle was hired to sculpt the brass statue, which was installed in 1884. The granite base and pedestal was designed and built by John Ray [Roy], architect; contract dated 1877, at a cost of $26,474. John Hagan, a builder, was contracted to "furnish and set" the column at a cost of $9,350.[6] The monument was dedicated in 1884, at Tivoli Circle (since commonly called Lee Circle) on St. Charles Avenue. Dignitaries present at the dedication on February 22—George Washington's birthday—included former Confederate President Jefferson Davis, two daughters of General Lee- Mary Custis Lee and Mildred Childe Lee, and Confederate General P.G.T. Beauregard.*

No mention of a voting process for erecting it. I looked through the history of the Richmond monuments and could not find any references to voting, only city planning surveys for the site. There is really no information on this that I can Seem to find. Some states enacted laws at the state level that removing historical statues requires a state level vote. Reading the history on them is pretty interesting, though. Most were erected between 1890 and the early 1950s. There is much implication of reinforcing Jim Crow era race laws and, later, backlash to the Civil Rights movement.

Interesting for sure. I guess my point is they went through a process to put them up, whatever that was at the time, so we need a process in place to take them down.

Interesting points. I recall reading about this stuff before BLM and Antifa were a thing that suggested what Poser alludes to above: "There is much implication of reinforcing Jim Crow era race laws and, later, backlash to the Civil Rights movement". Who knows, maybe there were a bunch of people who were totally against slavery and loved black folks but just felt they really needed to celebrate the general who waged war against the US in the name of slavery with a statue.

I am not disagreeing with you at all or even saying they need to stay up. I would just like to see a process in place to have these removed correctly, that would at least hinder that being done for political theater. Otherwise the way things are going now, every four years or so they will be putting up statues and then taking them down, depending on who is in office.

Either way, tearing them down is destruction and should be prosecuted. If someone want to tear up their own property, more power to them. Just keep you hands off stuff that isn’t yours. That and mind your own business. This world would be a much better place.

 

[Ozarkansas]

”

Victor Davis Hanson’s “A war like no other” examines how Athens ate itself from within and was ultimately defeated by Sparta. It’s relevant today because it’s leftist Athens vs right-wing Sparta. (Many social programs, comparable to those within our modern-day, were also put in place under the guise of compassion.)

Athen’s posture couldn’t be sustained because the 2500 year old learning lesson is that no civilization that has moved leftward survives without a totalitarian regime. Period. For those of you interested, it’s a great read, despite being from an honored academic; as Hanson adeptly weaves the history of Athen’s demise with examples of daily public and military life. Regardless, the cautionary tale, is that no civilization in recorded history has survived a concerted move to the left.

Aaron Lewis’ song strikes a cord with me because I’m 55 and was enlisted in the mid 1980’s. Our training was aimed at the Big Red Star. Communism was doomed and we KNEW it. We were proud to call ourselves Americans. We wept when the Miracle on Ice happened because our amateurs beat a national COMMUNIST professional team. 35 years on and numerous politicians, organizations, corporations, media outlets, EMBRACE it as if they know nothing of the 20th century’s 100 million corpses scattered by this failed totalitarian system.

I feel like that is an over generalization of the peloponnesian war and the reasons Sparta won. Sparta had a lot of allies (including the Persians) that were able to sow chaos on Athens far-flung colonies. Military disaster in Sicily defending those colonies and the destructive plague of Athens also played a major role. It was much more complicated than Athens making a move to the left and then collapsing.

Also, Sparta itself was soon thereafter crushed by the more liberal Thebans and their all-gay shock troops known as the Sacred Band (No Joke) because the Spartans were too conservative and had failed to adapt their military tactics in response to Theban doctrine.

 

[Mudd Foot]

I feel like that is an over generalization of the peloponnesian war and the reasons Sparta won. Sparta had a lot of allies (including the Persians) that were able to sow chaos on Athens far-flung colonies. Military disaster in Sicily defending those colonies and the destructive plague of Athens also played a major role. It was much more complicated than Athens making a move to the left and then collapsing.

Also, Sparta itself was soon thereafter crushed by the more liberal Thebans and their all-gay shock troops known as the Sacred Band (No Joke) because the Spartans were too conservative and had failed to adapt their military tactics in response to Theban doctrine.

Would suggest you read the book (or at least the Prologue) before commenting on the generalization Hanson himself has provided both in the book itself and in lecture. Especially when using the very disaster (Syracuse)that he uses as a prime example in the heart of his argument.

No offense but your second paragraph has no bearing whatsoever on the issue of Athen’s demise that Hanson expertly re-illuminates. Re-illuminates relates to his use of Athenian Thucydides own Histories.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ozarkansas]

Would suggest you read the book (or at least the Prologue) before commenting on the generalization Hanson himself has provided both in the book itself and in lecture. Especially when using the very disaster (Syracuse)that he uses as a prime example in the heart of his argument.

No offense but your second paragraph has no bearing whatsoever on the issue of Athen’s demise that Hanson adroitly illuminates.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I’m not criticizing the author at all because as you say, I haven’t read the book. I’m critical the idea that Athens’ fall can be summed up as a simple matter of them becoming more “left”.
I drew a parallel to Thebes because you made the comparison of leftist Athens vs. “right wing” Sparta. Your point seems to be that Athens fell for shifting to the left, but Sparta fell not long after despite being “right wing”. In fact the battle in which the more liberal Thebans crushed Sparta is still a pretty common military study topic as an example of failing to adapt, and Spartan society has been pointed to as a reason for military stagnation by several historians.

in summary I don’t doubt that the book is a good read, but I disagree with the position that Athens fell because it shifted to the left. It was a turbulent time in the Greek world and several different city states rose to power and then fell over the period of just a couple hundred years, regardless of whether they were leftists or right wing.

 

[Mudd Foot]

I’m not criticizing the author at all because as you say, I haven’t read the book. I’m critical the idea that Athens’ fall can be summed up as a simple matter of them becoming more “left”.
I drew a parallel to Thebes because you made the comparison of leftist Athens vs. “right wing” Sparta. Your point seems to be that Athens fell for shifting to the left, but Sparta fell not long after despite being “right wing”. In fact the battle in which the more liberal Thebans crushed Sparta is still a pretty common military study topic as an example of failing to adapt, and Spartan society has been pointed to as a reason for military stagnation by several historians.

in summary I don’t doubt that the book is a good read, but I disagree with the position that Athens fell because it shifted to the left. It was a turbulent time in the Greek world and several different city states rose to power and then fell over the period of just a couple hundred years, regardless of whether they were leftists or right wing.

Understood; to be clear you’re arguing against Hanson using well-documented, and contemporary accounts. In terms of the statement that “no civilization in recorded history has survived a leftward shift”; I’m pretty sure Hanson made that statement somewhere in the book. He painstakingly supports his thesis using every example Thucydides chronicles. Another example was how Athens dealt with the plague you previously referenced. Again, the point is a society that we hold up today as a “Golden Age” lasted less than 40 years after they went strongly to the left.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Metalhead12]

I appreciate the message, but he could have made it much better without the foul language!

Yes I agree with this

 

[Ozarkansas]

Understood; to be clear you’re arguing against Hanson using well-documented, and contemporary accounts. In terms of the statement that “no civilization in recorded history has survived a leftward shift”; I’m pretty sure Hanson made that statement somewhere in the book. He painstakingly supports his thesis using every example Thucydides chronicles. Another example was how Athens dealt with the plague you previously referenced. Again, the point is a society that we hold up today as a “Golden Age” lasted less than 40 years after they went strongly to the left.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The fact that Athens experienced a societal collapse that contributed to their defeat by the Spartans is not what I’m arguing. I’m arguing that leftward societal shifts aren’t intrinsically bad, and rightward societal shifts aren’t intrinsically good. The Spanish empire and hapsburg dynasty in general is an example of a rightward (catholic/antiprotestant) shift resulting in the weakening of an empire, and England post-Glorious Revolution is an example of a nation becoming stronger after a leftward shift. Ultimately every nation in history except those that currently exist has fallen, whether they went left like Athens or right like Sparta. Societal collapse can happen regardless of which direction the shift is in.

anyway I doubt anyone else on this thread cares to watch a couple nerds argue about the Athenian decline. That being said I do enjoy history debates so if you want to keep this going I say we do it via PM.

 

[MattB]

The funny thing with terms like "liberal" and "conservative" is that their meaning changes over time. At one time, not that long ago, the people that signed their names on the bottom of the Constitution were considered liberal in their beliefs. The idea that people could govern themselves was a liberal belief but now, in todays terms, they are considered conservative.

The problem with terms like "liberal" and "conservatives" is that they are used to lump people into groups but they don't have true parameters. I believe that taxation is theft, printers should go brrrr making gun parts, gay people should be able to get married, and people should be able to grow pot in their garden....where do I fall in the "liberal" or "conservative" camp today and where would I have fallen with the same beliefs 15 years ago? If I told you two of those four things, how would it change what I am called or what camp I am in?

We all know that on Rokslide, the term “liberal” refers to someone that disagrees with over something for which you are not articulate enough to provide a counter-argument.

 

[zion zig zag]

anyway I doubt anyone else on this thread cares to watch a couple nerds argue about the Athenian decline.

You'd be wrong. I'd keep reading!

 

[Poser]

Interesting for sure. I guess my point is they went through a process to put them up, whatever that was at the time, so we need a process in place to take them down.

I am not disagreeing with you at all or even saying they need to stay up. I would just like to see a process in place to have these removed correctly, that would at least hinder that being done for political theater. Otherwise the way things are going now, every four years or so they will be putting up statues and then taking them down, depending on who is in office.

Either way, tearing them down is destruction and should be prosecuted. If someone want to tear up their own property, more power to them. Just keep you hands off stuff that isn’t yours. That and mind your own business. This world would be a much better place.

These are all different scenarios and I’m sure at least some of the processes for erecting confederate monuments were dubious at best (ie let’s remind these Negros who’s really in charge around here), but:

In Memphis, the changing of names of city parks was voted on in 2013 and the removal of the NBF statue was voted on in 2015. In both cases by the city council. To proceed with this removal, they had to seek permission from the Tennessee Heritage Protection Act, a law that governs such removal, and were denied the request. So, the city sold the land to a Greenspace non profit. Since the land was now private, the NP removed the statue and returned it to the Sons of Confederate veterans.

In New Orleans, the process was much more complex with the city council offering a 60 day public comment period, attempts by the governor to stop the removal, death threats against the pending contractor who would remove the monuments, a federal injunction against the city and then that injunction overturned in the US Court of appeals, with the mayor finally ordering the removal. I believe the plan is to house them in a museum.

I’m not going to dive into every one of these, I know there were some statues torn down by protestors, in some cases, the wrong statues, but it does sound as if many or most of the ones officially removed were removed through legal channels with lawsuits filed and state and federal court opinions issued along the way.

 

[Poser]

We all know that on Rokslide, the term “liberal” refers to someone that disagrees with over something for which you are not articulate enough to provide a counter-argument.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[zion zig zag]

We all know that on Rokslide, the term “liberal” refers to someone that disagrees with over something for which you are not articulate enough to provide a counter-argument.

What about when you are called a liberal, non-hunter that lives in mama's basement? Do I get bonus points for offering to buy the guy a beer and getting ignored?