And down come the monuments to the Confederacy....

[juleswin]

And the more history is discredited, scrubbed, demonized and redefined as immoral, and the more historical figures are judged by the standard of a much more enlightened age than their own, the easier it will be for the populace to be played in this, to quote Orwell, 'endless present where the State cn do no wrong.'

Are these statues worth crying over? Lee was memorialized for many, many more reasons than someone misses their slaves. Tear down the statue and it's harder to convince someone who just fell of the turnip truck that history--or the present, for that matter--has depth and complexity.

Yes, books survive. But their numbers are diminished. Whether Bradburian 'fire departments' come after them or not.



Careful. You call them anti-liberty because they disagree with you on your 'own pet issues'.

Libertarians traditionally agreed with Democrats on social issues and Republicans on economic issues. The Powers that be are driving the wedge by obfuscating to Democrats our social tolerance, and getting Republicans worked up about things other than fiscal irresponsibility. So, people who identify with either 'side of the aisle' are alienated from us.

Why would you help them do that?

I am quite sure if I understand the first paragraph but I do agree that physical books are slowly becoming a relic of the past and removing tangible monuments might help accelerate the redefinition of society's knowledge about our history. But still, I just think the bigger picture is about painting a narrative of non establishment right as batshit, confederate worshiping neo nazis. If they could achieve this goal without removing the statue, I bet they would do that too

 

[acptulsa]

What is not anti liberty about taxes and regulations?
I call them anti liberty because they are, some people on the right oppose the things that republicans do that are wrong nobody on the left opposes taxes and regulations.
Perhaps you are confusing anarchists with leftists? My disagreements with anarchists are different and I would not say there are no good anarchists.

And they call you anti-liberty because some people who also self-identify as 'The Right' support asset forfeiture and the PATRIOT Act.

Am I confusing 'leftists' with [insert some other label here]? I'm talking about individuals, who think they only have two choices and are trying to weigh one of them against the other. Are you confusing individuals with mass-produced bots?

 

[Swordsmyth]

Compensated emancipation in the US, while obviously a preferable solution in theory, would have amounted to roughly $2.88b in 1855 in order to emancipate every slave in the South. To put that in perspective, by GDP, the entire US economy was worth about $3.96b at the time. The figures we're looking at would just be enough for slave owners to break even. If the US had compensated slaveholders in the South even double what the British did, it would have been a paltry sum not worth considering.

You also need to consider that in the US South, slaves were not just workers but a form of capital. While they could depreciate in value due to old age, they were assets that could be sold and even yield greater wealth through child birth given that the children of slaves would then become the slave master's property that they could sell at market.

To compare with the British Caribbean, slaves were mainly used as cheap labor, not as capital; furthermore, compensation was paid for by most of the British nation via taxation — across the whole of the national economy. In the US, it would fall almost entirely on Northern states to compensate the South, and to make that politically viable for electors, they would need to somehow convince non-slaveholders to pay an enormous amount of money to abolish slavery — which would have been difficult no matter the moral ground.

While we tend to focus on the economics of slavery, another important aspect was the psychological and cultural aspect of it: The culture of white supremacy and slave holding among the elite. Generally, the elite viewed freedom purely through the lens of property rights, not personal liberty. In other words, being free meant owning property without limits; not being free meant to be property. Not only was it a form of capital and labor, but slaves were also an indicator of social status. It was deeply ingrained into Southern culture. They viewed slavery as a moral good! They convinced themselves that they were doing everyone a favor by upholding the institution of slavery! You were dealing with both economics and a twisted sense of morality.

Taking all of this into account, I honestly don't see how compensated emancipation would have been a realistic alternative, sadly.

Frankly, outside of compensated emancipation, an outcome where every slave master was imprisoned or shot in the head if they refused to release their slaves would have been just fine, John Brown style.

The south was in the process of abolishing slavery, leftists like you are like the girl from willy wonka you want it NOW and you don't care who you have to kill or what you have to destroy to get it.
Slavery could have been gone in a generation with no violence if new born blacks were declared free, importation had already been outlawed and the number of slaves was dropping due to slave holders freeing them and a low birth rate in captivity.

 

[Swordsmyth]

And they call you anti-liberty because some people who also self-identify as 'The Right' support asset forfeiture and the PATRIOT Act.

Some is the key word in that sentence, ALL leftists want more taxes and regulations.

 

[Anti Federalist]

Just wanted to point out real quick that the statue that was torn down in Durham was erected for the soldiers that fought for the Confederacy. Probably lost on these protesters was the fact that many of the soldiers that fought and died were conscripted and had no choice. Not every soldier that fought for the Confederacy believed in slavery or the cause of the Confederacy, just as not every soldier that fought for the North believed in a war to end slavery and the cause of the Union.

Most of them did not.

They fought for the same reason so many men have fought and died in wars before.

Because they were forced to by law.

Or because they were defending their homes.

 

[Anti Federalist]

And they call you anti-liberty because some people who also self-identify as 'The Right' support asset forfeiture and the PATRIOT Act.

Wonder what the "right" thinks of law enforcement after all this?

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Left vs. right:

It is popular in some circles to say there is no difference. This is because of the establishment domination of the two parties that supposedly represent those two sides. They cater to each side, but behind the scenes, they are part of the same machine. In that regard, there is no difference.

But there is a basic, fundamental difference between the two. The right tends to rely on logic, the left tends to rely on emotion. It's that simple. Arguments to each side are most effective when following that basic rule.

It is also the basis for frustration between the two sides. Why are people on the right so cold hearted? Why don't they care about people, animals and their feelings? Why are people on the left so blind to contradictions and the ramifications of policies and actions?

For those who are interested in Myers/Briggs, it is simply the difference between T and F.

Once again, don't mix this with the charlatans that simply cater to one side or the other, usually with a hidden agenda. Hidden agendas are not limited to the left or the right. Liars, thieves and criminals have no preference for emotion or logic. They like whatever works.

 

[enhanced_deficit]

The Taliban and ISIL have been pretty good at removing outdated monuments, statues, art, etc.

Perhaps some of them can be brought to the US as consultants on best practices.

One side effect of such argument will be that it could further reinforce "Obama supported ISIS" narrative if folks behind recent demolition turned out to be his supporters.

Related

In context: The Winston Churchill and MLK busts
www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/.../context-winston-churchill-and-mlk-busts/
Jan 22, 2017 - A symbolic sculpture - ... "Obama started his presidency by returning to the British Embassy the bust of Winston Churchill ...



Trump brings Churchill bust back to Oval Office
www.cnn.com/2017/01/20/politics/trump-churchill-oval-office/index.html
Jan 20, 2017 - President Donald Trump restored the bust of Winston Churchill to the Oval ... while the figure of Martin Luther King Jr. that former President Barack Obama had ... Obama returned the Churchill bust or refused to display the bust ...

 

[acptulsa]

Some is the key word in that sentence, ALL leftists want more taxes and regulations.

1. No, some want existing taxes redirected to things other than, for example, war, and bad regulations scrapped in favor of what they see as good regulations. Are they wrong? Yes, but only half-wrong. Are they evil? No.

2. These things are evil. But do they want them because they are evil? Or were they just brainwashed into associating them with good things, and made to believe no one can have the good things without these things? Are they wrong? Yes. If you dismiss them as evil out of hand, and wash your hands of them before you even meet them, who will reeducate them?

But there is a basic, fundamental difference between the two. The right tends to rely on logic, the left tends to rely on emotion. It's that simple.

Is it really? Is that why you see grown men crying their eyes out when the Star Spangled Banner plays, and turning purple and yelling at people about dead Americans whenever the PATRIOT Act is criticized in their presence?

No, the 'Left' and the 'Right' are carefully crafted to attract equal amounts of foolish useful idiots, stimulate equal amounts of emotion, and simultaneously embrace and defy equal amounts of logic.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Left vs. right:

It is popular in some circles to say there is no difference. This is because of the establishment domination of the two parties that supposedly represent those two sides. They cater to each side, but behind the scenes, they are part of the same machine. In that regard, there is no difference.

But there is a basic, fundamental difference between the two. The right tends to rely on logic, the left tends to rely on emotion. It's that simple. Arguments to each side are most effective when following that basic rule.

It is also the basis for frustration between the two sides. Why are people on the right so cold hearted? Why don't they care about people, animals and their feelings? Why are people on the left so blind to contradictions and the ramifications of policies and actions?

For those who are interested in Myers/Briggs, it is simply the difference between T and F.

Once again, don't mix this with the charlatans that simply cater to one side or the other, usually with a hidden agenda. Hidden agendas are not limited to the left or the right. Liars, thieves and criminals have no preference for emotion or logic. They like whatever works.

A generally correct analysis, but the powers of government and emotion don't mix well, leftists have no business in government.

 

[Swordsmyth]

1. No, some want existing taxes redirected to things other than, for example, war, and bad regulations scrapped in favor of what they see as good regulations. Are they wrong? Yes. Are they evil? No.

2. These things are evil. But do they want them because they are evil? Or were they just brainwashed into associating them with good things, and made to believe no one can have the good things without these things? Are they wrong? Yes. If you dismiss them as evil out of hand, and wash your hands of them before you even meet them, who will reeducate them?

I did not say "evil", I said there are no good ones, the only good leftist is an ex-leftist, I attempt to educate everyone I interact with but I have yet to convert a single leftist away from their religion of government, though I have heard of some who did succeed and have dealt with some former leftists.

 

[acptulsa]

I did not say "evil", I said there are no good ones, the only good leftist is an ex-leftist, I attempt to educate everyone I interact with but I have yet to convert a single leftist away from their religion of government, though I have heard of some who did succeed and have dealt with some former leftists.

You'll get to where you can do it too. Seeing them not as 'leftists' but as individuals with certain bits of misinformation in their otherwise human heads is an important step. It will make your pitch much more effective.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

A generally correct analysis, but the powers of government and emotion don't mix well, leftists have no business in government.

You don't want a government with no concern for people. Likewise, you don't want a government with no concern for rational reason.

 

[acptulsa]

You don't want a government with no concern for people. Likewise, you don't want a government with no concern for rational reason.

And most of all, you don't want a government which is dedicated to depriving the people of rational reason.

But we seem to have one anyway.

 

[Swordsmyth]

You don't want a government with no concern for people. Likewise, you don't want a government with no concern for rational reason.

Reason must be dominant in government, some leftists use a little reason but they always let emotion dominate, those on the right are capable of adding some emotion into the mix while keeping reason dominant, those few "leftists" who learn to let reason dominate always "magically" transform into ex-leftists because that is how the definitions go.

 

[Swordsmyth]

You'll get to where you can do it too. Seeing them not as 'leftists' but as individuals with certain bits of misinformation in their otherwise human heads is an important step. It will make your pitch much more effective.

I see all people as individuals but I keep track of their current status as well, "labels" like everything else have a proper place and level of emphasis.

 

[Antischism]

The south was in the process of abolishing slavery, leftists like you are like the girl from willy wonka you want it NOW and you don't care who you have to kill or what you have to destroy to get it.
Slavery could have been gone in a generation with no violence if new born blacks were declared free, importation had already been outlawed and the number of slaves was dropping due to slave holders freeing them and a low birth rate in captivity.

Yeah, it makes total sense that the South was ready to give up a huge part of their economy, culture, and means of labor from the kindness of their hearts. The big bad North just didn't let them get to it first.

Arming freed slaves and murdering slave masters would have been justified on every level unless you view black people as property. If you disagree, I'd love to hear your thoughts on a castle doctrine.

Reason must be dominant in government, some leftists use a little reason but they always let emotion dominate, those on the right are capable of adding some emotion into the mix while keeping reason dominant, those few "leftists" who learn to let reason dominate always "magically" transform into ex-leftists because that is how the definitions go.

You speak a lot about emotion, but you're the one who has consistently been name-calling me (including a neg rep where you called me a "YANKEE" in capital letters as if to insult me), while I've been calmly stating my views. It seems like you're letting emotion get in the way of reason.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Is it really? Is that why you see grown men crying their eyes out when the Star Spangled Banner plays, and turning purple and yelling at people about dead Americans whenever the PATRIOT Act is criticized in their presence?

No, the 'Left' and the 'Right' are carefully crafted to attract equal amounts of foolish useful idiots, stimulate equal amounts of emotion, and simultaneously embrace and defy equal amounts of logic.

Just because a person is logical does not mean they lack emotion. Likewise, someone who has an emotional preference can certainly utilize logic.

Like I said, these basic fundamentals are deceptively manipulated by the establishment, politicians and the two parties in the US. I was quite explicit about that. Did you read that part of my post?

Once again, Myers-Briggs is helpful in understanding the fundamental difference:

This third preference pair describes how you like to make decisions. Do you like to put more weight on objective principles and impersonal facts (Thinking) or do you put more weight on personal concerns and the people involved (Feeling)?

Don't confuse Feeling with emotion. Everyone has emotions about the decisions they make. Also do not confuse Thinking with intelligence.

Everyone uses Thinking for some decisions and Feeling for others. In fact, a person can make a decision using his or her preference, then test the decision by using the other preference to see what might not have been taken into account.

Take a minute to ask yourself which of the following descriptions seems more natural, effortless, and comfortable for you?

Thinking (T)

When I make a decision, I like to find the basic truth or principle to be applied, regardless of the specific situation involved. I like to analyze pros and cons, and then be consistent and logical in deciding. I try to be impersonal, so I won't let my personal wishes--or other people's wishes--influence me.

The following statements generally apply to me:

I enjoy technical and scientific fields where logic is important.
I notice inconsistencies.
I look for logical explanations or solutions to most everything.
I make decisions with my head and want to be fair.
I believe telling the truth is more important than being tactful.
Sometimes I miss or don't value the "people" part of a situation.
I can be seen as too task-oriented, uncaring, or indifferent.

Feeling (F)

I believe I can make the best decisions by weighing what people care about and the points-of-view of persons involved in a situation. I am concerned with values and what is the best for the people involved. I like to do whatever will establish or maintain harmony. In my relationships, I appear caring, warm, and tactful.

The following statements generally apply to me:

I have a people or communications orientation.
I am concerned with harmony and nervous when it is missing.
I look for what is important to others and express concern for others.
I make decisions with my heart and want to be compassionate.
I believe being tactful is more important than telling the "cold" truth.
Sometimes I miss seeing or communicating the "hard truth" of situations.
I am sometimes experienced by others as too idealistic, mushy, or indirect.
...
http://www.myersbriggs.org/my-mbti-personality-type/mbti-basics/thinking-or-feeling.htm

 

[Swordsmyth]

Yeah, it makes total sense that the South was ready to give up a huge part of their economy, culture, and means of labor from the kindness of their hearts. The big bad North just didn't let them get to it first.

Quite true, if you educate yourself you might find out.

Arming freed slaves and murdering slave masters would have been justified on every level unless you view black people as property. If you disagree, I'd love to hear your thoughts on a castle doctrine.

People who were born and raised in a bad system don't magically become acceptable targets for murder, you could argue that the slaves had a right to revolt but Yankees had no business getting involved especially through government action.

The south was in the process of eliminating slavery, major changes like that take time, for one thing just dumping people who have always been kept like zoo animals out on the street en masse would have been cruel to the ex-slaves, in fact the union did just that and it did no go well for the freed slaves.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

I did not say "evil", I said there are no good ones, the only good leftist is an ex-leftist, I attempt to educate everyone I interact with but I have yet to convert a single leftist away from their religion of government, though I have heard of some who did succeed and have dealt with some former leftists.

I don't believe that love of government, authority or structure is part of being left or right, T or F.

There are authoritarians on both sides. There are those who want government on both sides. What you will find is that the side who believes that government is currently on their side will tend to support it, and more of it.

Look into S/N and P/J in Myers/Briggs for characteristics that are independent of left and right.