Erasing History

Discussion in 'History & Geography' started by Diane Lane, Aug 16, 2016.

  1. Martin Alonzo

    Martin Alonzo Veteran Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2015
    Messages:
    3,372
    Likes Received:
    3,259
    If Hillary had won I would probably have Frank as a next door neighbour here in the DR and that would be a good thing.
     
    #16
    Frank Sanoica likes this.
  2. Ken Anderson

    Ken Anderson Greeter
    Moderator Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2015
    Messages:
    10,880
    Likes Received:
    15,044
    ulysses-grant-slaveholder.jpg

    Who is buried in Grant’s tomb? Ulysses S. Grant, slaveholder. Grant owned slaves until 1865, when Missouri abolished slavery. In contrast, Confederate General Robert E. Lee freed his slaves in 1862, upon the death of his father-in-law.

    “There are few, I believe, in this enlightened age, who will not acknowledge that slavery as an institution is a moral and political evil.” -- Robert E. Lee
     
    #17
    Bobby Cole and Frank Sanoica like this.
  3. Martin Alonzo

    Martin Alonzo Veteran Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2015
    Messages:
    3,372
    Likes Received:
    3,259
    Blacks own slaves as well so does that make black bad ????
     
    #18
    Bobby Cole likes this.
  4. Frank Sanoica

    Frank Sanoica Veteran Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2016
    Messages:
    6,008
    Likes Received:
    5,613
    @Martin Alonzo
    But who owns the slaves who are not black?
    Frank
     
    #19
  5. Bobby Cole

    Bobby Cole Veteran Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2015
    Messages:
    2,891
    Likes Received:
    5,285
    First off, I need to qualify myself by saying that there is nothing inherently good about slavery of any kind.
    That said, slavery was all about supply and demand for a product and the demand for said product was high early in American history. Now, simply put, that there are those who wish to obliterate anything that would remind all of us of our own history if there was any hint of slavery in the mix of whatever portion is found in it.
    I might be able to see some small bit of validity in the movement if it were not for the fact that most of the hostility is coming from people who proudly carry the name of African-American.

    The question has been asked thousands of times by millions of people as to why are people so proud of their mother continent when it was their mother continent which allowed their ancestors to be sold into slavery in the first place? As a matter of fact, Africa still has a huge problem with slavery (both white and black slaves) that I would believe that taking on the name of the host continent would be some sort of type of denigration rather than one of greatness.

    No, I am not attempting to make light of any aspect of the making of human beings as a common commodity to be bought as sold. I am saying quite the opposite for to me it is like the drug trade in that I feel badly for the user but I realize that getting rid of the user is not the way to get rid of drugs. I go back to that which I despise the most which is the seller.

    If the progeny of slaves on American soil wish to destroy the objects which might or might not point to slavery then I would start by completely removing that which is very source of my disgruntled convictions. I would think the very name of Africa and all it stands for including its slave selling culture would first be under attack rather than being championed. When I see people like Michelle Obama wearing diamonds and talking about slavery it crawls up my back like an itch I can't scratch. The very diamonds she wears are more than likely dug up by none other than African.......slaves.

    I do not see anyone destroying their diamonds which to me are the greatest reminder of what slavery is about. It's all hypocritical.
     
    #20
    Last edited: May 13, 2017
    Martin Alonzo likes this.
  6. Bobby Cole

    Bobby Cole Veteran Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2015
    Messages:
    2,891
    Likes Received:
    5,285
    The absolute idiocy of the gambit as a whole is that while the past is condemned there is not one person on the face of the earth who can tell me that they would not have been involved in the high interest bearing commodity of the slave business if they were born 200 or more years ago. Not one!
    For the most part, it was accepted by a majority of countries and whole continents and totally legal.
    We can lie to ourselves, stomp our feet and weep for past indignities imposed on other races, genders and beliefs but it was part of the norm and environment of that time. We can yell from the roof tops that we would have NEVER held indentured servants or slaves had we lived in a far gone historical era but it would be nonetheless a lie because we do not know. I'd be pure as the driven snow and would stand up as a bastion against all the sins man imposed on man. It's a Lie because I do not know but always fear who I might have been rather than who I am and what I presently stand for.

    For me, I will continue to embrace the past and all of its rights and wrongs so that I can see the possibilities of a better future.
     
    #21
  7. Gary Ridenour

    Gary Ridenour Very Well-Known Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2015
    Messages:
    1,967
    Likes Received:
    2,405
    they can't erase this because past generations insure present and future generations see it. you can tear down the monuments but not the events. which live forever

     
    #22
    Bobby Cole and Frank Sanoica like this.
  8. Martin Alonzo

    Martin Alonzo Veteran Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2015
    Messages:
    3,372
    Likes Received:
    3,259
    • A reflex ion the slave history
    • 6800 B.C. The world’s first city-state emerges in Mesopotamia. Land ownership and the early stages of technology bring war—in which enemies are captured and forced to work: slavery.
    • 2575 B.C. Temple art celebrates the capture of slaves in battle. Egyptians capture slaves by sending special expeditions up the Nile River.
    • 550 B.C. The city-state of Athens uses as many as 30,000 slaves in its silver mines.
    • 120 A.D. Roman military campaigns capture slaves by the thousands. Some estimate the population of Rome is more than half slave.
    • 500 Anglo-Saxons enslave the native Britons after invading England.
    • 1000 Slavery is a normal practice in England’s rural, agricultural economy, as destitute workers place themselves and their families in a form of debt bondage to landowners.
    • 1380 In the aftermath of the Black Plague, Europe’s slave trade thrives in response to a labor shortage. Slaves pour in from all over the continent, the Middle East, and North Africa.
    • 1444 Portuguese traders bring the first large cargo of slaves from West Africa to Europe by sea—establishing the Atlantic slave trade.
    • 1526 Spanish explorers bring the first African slaves to settlements in what would become the United States. These first African-Americans stage the first known slave revolt in the Americas.
    • 1550 Slaves are depicted as objects of conspicuous consumption in much Renaissance art.
    • 1641 Massachusetts becomes the first British colony to legalize slavery.

    The while slavery done by the Barbary pirates . Which was even more cruel than the African/ American.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/empire_seapower/white_slaves_01.shtml

    Funny that if you do a Google search on just the word slavery you will get more hits on the American slavery than on any other Why are they making this more important you know why.
     
    #23
  9. Martin Alonzo

    Martin Alonzo Veteran Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2015
    Messages:
    3,372
    Likes Received:
    3,259
    Most people have forgot this because the Japanese did not own the news media and Hollywood
    Japanese Internment during WW II
     
    #24
    Frank Sanoica likes this.
  10. Gary Ridenour

    Gary Ridenour Very Well-Known Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2015
    Messages:
    1,967
    Likes Received:
    2,405
    there was a reason for the internment of the Japanese after Pearl Harbor. before this attack Japanese pilots were told if their aircraft were damage and could not make the trip back to the Carrier TF's to head west and land on an Island called Niihau also known as “The Forbidden Island". believed to be uninhabited they would be picked up by submarine. one such pilot, Shigenori Nishikaichi flew a Zero in the attack that morning and was damaged. so he flew to this island. the western most island in the Hawaiian chain. but upon landing he found the opposite. the population there was part Japanese, Americans and British. the pilot tried to convince the Japanese there the other's were their enemies. a battle ensued.

    [​IMG]

    One thing is for sure, the actions of Yoshio Harada either contributed to or justified the reasons of relocating people with Japanese roots to internment camps.

    Incident link
     
    #25
    Frank Sanoica and Ken Anderson like this.
  11. Kalvin Mitnic

    Kalvin Mitnic Well-Known Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2017
    Messages:
    401
    Likes Received:
    291
    What is said about the others that kept slaves?
    Africans-Arabs-Indigenous peoples all took -take slaves. Beside if rights are restricted as in misogyny freedom to vote,of and from religion, free press then slavery continues it's simply a matter of degree.
    Caste still exists as does human rights denied.
     
    #26
  12. Ken Anderson

    Ken Anderson Greeter
    Moderator Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2015
    Messages:
    10,880
    Likes Received:
    15,044
    American Indian tribes took slaves, and they burned entire forests to get an advantage in war or while hunting, yet we're supposed to view our indigenous people as if they were peaceful stewards of nature. Too often, history becomes little more than a political narrative.
     
    #27
  13. Bobby Cole

    Bobby Cole Veteran Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2015
    Messages:
    2,891
    Likes Received:
    5,285
    Again, a true statement. History is skewed to please the person it is being told to. It's always the other guy who starts a fight or a war, Edison was a master inventor and Columbus discovered the U.S. Ben Franklin was beloved by all, and Andrew Jackson beat the British outside of New Orleans.

    Edison was a great idea man and businessman, but no so much the actual hands on inventor. Columbus didn't discover America, Ben Franklin had some uh, sexuality problems and flirted his time as an Ambassor to France.
    Andy Jackson slaughtered hundreds of Seminole Indians because they protected escaped slaves.

    Bottom line is that there are always some falsehoods with nearly all of the way stories are told about the major actors involved with history but the Great things they did should always be remembered.
     
    #28
  14. Augusta Heathbourne

    Augusta Heathbourne Active Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2017
    Messages:
    79
    Likes Received:
    112
    I was sad about the removal of the R E Lee statue in New Orleans until I read that Lee himself disapproved of monuments to the lost cause on the grounds that it would aggravate Northerners and, by doing so, do no favours to Southerners; that it was a needless expense in a time of want; and that the country should follow the lead of other nations by letting the battlefields grow over and heal, and NOT be preserved - which only preserved the passions of the war itself. That paraphrases what he said in documents that can be found at the University of Virginia and the Library of Congress. I admire many of the Generals of the Civil War, both North and South, and think they are worth reading about, knowing about and remembering.

    That said, I get very weary of political correctness and sometimes think 'just leave the darn monuments alone, aren't there enough real problems in your city to solve without wasting time, money and effort on this?' But apparently not.
     
    #29
    Bobby Cole likes this.
  15. Kalvin Mitnic

    Kalvin Mitnic Well-Known Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2017
    Messages:
    401
    Likes Received:
    291
    A monument to man is to celebrate an accomplishment. Killing people is hardly to be celebrated.

    A monument to god , image,idol or honorific as 'supreme', is unfortunately often peripherally recognizing the atrocities committed in the gods name.
     
    #30
    Sheldon Scott and Frank Sanoica like this.

Share This Page