Non-American here.
So did Robert E. Lee own slaves or what? And why do democrats get off Scot free with the "muh slaves" card? I thought they were cunts to slaves as well.
Seems to be a very misunderstood and over emotional part of U.S. history.
Non-American here
Isaiah Nguyen
Other urls found in this thread:
thenation.com
youtube.com
pulsegulfcoast.com
youtube.com
twitter.com
Adam Sanchez
>So did Robert E. Lee own slaves or what?
Yes.
>And why do democrats get off Scot free with the "muh slaves" card?
I don't know what you're referring to with this. Slavery was a North vs. South issue. The northern states outlawed slavery, while the South embraced it. The Democrats were not an anti-slavery party. Most abolitionists were Republicans, including Abraham Lincoln. The Republican party was primarily northern, urban, and pro-business. They didn't become "the racist party" until a hundred years later in 1968, when the Democratic party embraced the civil rights movement and thereby lost the racist vote, which the Republicans were happy to take from them.
Gabriel Morris
>So did Robert E. Lee own slaves or what?
yes. Although he was against slavery oddly enough and thought it was "evil"
>And why do democrats get off Scot free with the "muh slaves" card? I thought they were cunts to slaves as well.
southern strategy. Interesting to note that all the south were democrats and Lincoln was the first Republican president
Benjamin King
>southern strategy
Biggest liberal meme of all time
Ayden Ross
>So did Robert E. Lee own slaves or what?
He was raised in Southern aristocracy, what do you think?
>And why do democrats get off Scot free with the "muh slaves" card? I thought they were cunts to slaves as well.
Liberals run the media and conveniently overlook that part when autistically screeching about "MUH SLAVERY" to shame everyone who won't suck niggerdick (or do in the case of Milo).
Come to think of it, neither Democrats or Republicans should be using those names because neither of them even remotely resembles their 19th Century counterpart.
Nicholas Parker
...
Grayson Torres
thenation.com
>You start out in 1954 by saying, “Nigger, nigger, nigger.” By 1968 you can’t say “nigger”—that hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states’ rights, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract. Now, you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites.… “We want to cut this,” is much more abstract than even the busing thing, uh, and a hell of a lot more abstract than “Nigger, nigger.”
Sebastian Walker
>GOP still pretending the party switch never happened
Camden Young
Oliver Ross
It was only partial. Northern Catholics have always leaned Democratic, while blacks switched to the Democratic Party in the 1930s because of the New Deal.
Elijah Mitchell
>There is a difference between remembrance of history and reverence of it. For America and New Orleans, it has been a long, winding road, marked by great tragedy and great triumph. But we cannot be afraid of our truth.
>So today I want to speak about why we chose to remove these four monuments to the Lost Cause of the Confederacy, but also how and why this process can move us towards healing and understanding of each other.
So, let’s start with the facts.
>The historic record is clear: the Robert E. Lee, Jefferson Davis, and P.G.T. Beauregard statues were not erected just to honor these men, but as part of the movement which became known as The Cult of the Lost Cause. This ‘cult’ had one goal — through monuments and through other means — to rewrite history to hide the truth, which is that the Confederacy was on the wrong side of humanity.
>First erected over 166 years after the founding of our city and 19 years after the end of the Civil War, the monuments that we took down were meant to rebrand the history of our city and the ideals of a defeated Confederacy.
>It is self-evident that these men did not fight for the United States of America, They fought against it. They may have been warriors, but in this cause they were not patriots.
>These statues are not just stone and metal. They are not just innocent remembrances of a benign history. These monuments purposefully celebrate a fictional, sanitized Confederacy; ignoring the death, ignoring the enslavement, and the terror that it actually stood for.
>After the Civil War, these statues were a part of that terrorism as much as a burning cross on someone’s lawn; they were erected purposefully to send a strong message to all who walked in their shadows about who was still in charge in this city.
Ian Mitchell
>1968, when the Democratic party embraced the civil rights movement and thereby lost the racist vote, which the Republicans were happy to take from them
It's a bit more complicated than that. LBJ shepherded the civil rights act but it was primarily Republicans that voted for it and only one of the many Democrats who voted against it switched to the GOP. The South didn't become a reliably Republican bastion until the 2000s.
Connor Thompson
>And why do democrats get off Scot free with the "muh slaves" card? I thought they were cunts to slaves as well.
Southern Democrats were mainly the ones who supported slavery and later segregation. The Democrats and Republicans in the 20th century sort of switched places. It's really noticable in the 60s when like said the Democrats embraced the Civil Rights Movement, but you can see signs of it in the 40s and 50s. Even up to the 90s the Democrats had a serious presence in the South.
Jaxon Perry
>the Robert E. Lee, Jefferson Davis, and P.G.T. Beauregard statues were not erected just to honor these men, but as part of the movement which became known as The Cult of the Lost Cause
>facts
Logan Davis
>LBJ shepherded the civil rights act
Which absolves him of fighting against earlier civil rights acts in the Senate.
Jacob Allen
No one today doubts that LBJs switch on civil rights was a completely cynical move. It's always been obvious that he never stopped hating blacks, and I don't think anyone actually believes otherwise, right or left.
Angel Sullivan
Fuck now I remember this fired gamer who pretends to be libertarian but recently made a video full of butthurt against "those who worship the traitors to the state"
I'm mad.
Jayden King
They were statues erected decades after the civil war to revere men who engaged in treason to defend a system where millions of human beings were owned as property, yes.
Lincoln Bell
>americans will call confederates traitors without a hint of irony
Juan Sanders
this
Aiden White
At least we didn't attack China for trying to ban opium.
Jaxson Turner
This. As a Louisianian, I've made this point, and it falls on deaf ears. It would be different if the statutues were built right after the war, but they were put up to spite those interested in racial progress. All I hear back is "muh history."
I personally would have left the Robert E. Lee statute up as a compromise. While he participated in much moral evil, he still had his virtues and he did good things after the war.
Dylan Perez