Stonewall Jackson Area Council Changes Name

[JoeBob]

Eh...  The War of Northern Aggression  was not started over slavery.  It was an economic move to force Southern states to support a fledgling Northern industrialization. The slavery issue was used as a crutch long after the war started to justify conscription of the unwilling. Read the newspaper editorials of the times and check your dates. (Conscription  Riots) 

If slavery was the focus of the war, why did Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation free only the Southern slaves and not those remaining in Northern territories?  To foster a slave rebellion that he hoped would siphon off troops.

Southern generals were traitors? Not according to the Northern generals who recruited many of them to serve in the US Army after the war.  I trust the judgement of military minds who fought as adversaries and then as allies, to be better informed of the character of their contemporary Southern generals than some armchair distortionist attempting  to warp history to fit today's political correctness. 

I'm not a Southern apologist. The South doesn't have a damn thing to apologize for. 

[qwazse]

3 hours ago, mds3d said:

This article assigns the quality of "purity" and "loyalty" to a man who betrayed his country to fight to defend the institution of slavery.  This is surely not an unbiased article.  

Cousin Robbie always challenges his students by asking if they would have supported slavery had they been brought up as an upstanding citizen of the south. They unanimously would answer of course not. He then goes on to point out that if he went back in time to a classroom of upstanding citizens in the 1850's south, they would have resoundingly answered of course.

The likes of Jackson did not betray us as much as resemble us.

And I say that as a grandson of immigrants whose forefathers shunned their countrymen's penchant for acquiring slaves as spoils of war.

 

[Navybone]

56 minutes ago, JoeBob said:

Eh...  The War of Northern Aggression  was not started over slavery...The South doesn't have a damn thing to apologize for. 

Honestly did not read anything after the first line and glad I did not after the last line.  At the end of the day, the US civil war was a war about slavery.  And where does that apply to scouting?  It does not.  

[Sentinel947]

2 hours ago, JoeBob said:

Eh...  The War of Northern Aggression  was not started over slavery.  It was an economic move to force Southern states to support a fledgling Northern industrialization. The slavery issue was used as a crutch long after the war started to justify conscription of the unwilling. Read the newspaper editorials of the times and check your dates. (Conscription  Riots) 

If slavery was the focus of the war, why did Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation free only the Southern slaves and not those remaining in Northern territories?  To foster a slave rebellion that he hoped would siphon off troops.

Southern generals were traitors? Not according to the Northern generals who recruited many of them to serve in the US Army after the war.  I trust the judgement of military minds who fought as adversaries and then as allies, to be better informed of the character of their contemporary Southern generals than some armchair distortionist attempting  to warp history to fit today's political correctness. 

I'm not a Southern apologist. The South doesn't have a damn thing to apologize for. 

The south left the union because of the threat of slavery ending. They said it as much in the CSA's founding documents. The Civil War was fought over slavery first and foremost. Economics and states rights all come back to slavery. 

As for former confederates reintegrating, it simply means they were more useful to the Union being reintegrated than being in prison. Former Nazi scientists were scooped up by the US government at the end of WW2, despite their involvement in Nazi Germanys war crimes. 

Sometimes after a war, pragmatism overrules idealism. 

 

 

[JoeBob]

10 hours ago, Navybone said:

Honestly did not read anything after the first line and glad I did not after the last line.

I love the way the end of your sentence refutes beginning,  honestly! 

Weak arguments that have little basis in fact or logic fail to stand against dispassionate analysis. 

http://slavenorth.com/slavenorth.htm   

On to climate change! 

Edited December 1, 2019 by JoeBob

[le Voyageur]

The times are changing. If it were not for change,  would we still be living in the dark ages thinking we are bloody enlighten as we've a priestclass that tell us what to think being that we can't read latin, let alone even read?  My thinking, time to end the Civil War and move on. And, if it means putting the Southern icons and statues along with the lies and revisionist babble  of the Daughters of the Confederacy on the trash heap of history, and the 900 section of the Library of Congress so be it. 

Edited December 1, 2019 by le Voyageur

[PACAN]

I heard that some councils will be changing their names to Leave No Trace council numbers x, y, z etc on December 31st. 😉

[TAHAWK]

On 11/30/2019 at 12:53 AM, yknot said:

These works are beautiful representations of public art that are a snap shot of a historical moment and help tell the history of the time they represent. It is shameful and ignorant that anyone should suggest their destruction, removal or denigration. This doesn't happen in many other countries, just the idiotic United States and Iran apparently. Historical monuments of different viewpoints and eras in history are deserving of preservation and protection. 

 

[TravelerJoe]

11 minutes ago, TAHAWK said:

 

Another one for you.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memento_Park

 

[TAHAWK]

On 11/30/2019 at 9:43 PM, JoeBob said:

Eh...  The War of Northern Aggression  was not started over slavery.  It was an economic move to force Southern states to support a fledgling Northern industrialization. The slavery issue was used as a crutch long after the war started to justify conscription of the unwilling. Read the newspaper editorials of the times and check your dates. (Conscription  Riots) 

If slavery was the focus of the war, why did Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation free only the Southern slaves and not those remaining in Northern territories?  To foster a slave rebellion that he hoped would siphon off troops.

Southern generals were traitors? Not according to the Northern generals who recruited many of them to serve in the US Army after the war.  I trust the judgement of military minds who fought as adversaries and then as allies, to be better informed of the character of their contemporary Southern generals than some armchair distortionist attempting  to warp history to fit today's political correctness. 

I'm not a Southern apologist. The South doesn't have a damn thing to apologize for. 

I can quote my own southern Ky ancestors that the "War of Northern Aggression" was aimed at slavery.  My late fraternal grandmother was National Commander of the Daughters of the Confederacy, so I've heard it all ("War is not civil!" is a favorite.).  But there is no need to quote her as the Confederate Constitution expressly makes enslavement of the "negro" a civil right of the so-called "White Race" and the rebel leaders were explicit that the threat to the preservation and expansion of chattel slavery of the "negro" was THE casus belli:

"No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed." 

"The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States; and shall have the right of transit and sojourn in any State of this Confederacy, with their slaves and other property; and the right of property in said slaves shall not be thereby  impaired."

"The Confederate States may acquire new territory; and Congress shall have power to legislate and provide governments for the inhabitants of all territory belonging to the Confederate States, lying without the limits of the several States; and may permit them, at such times, and in such manner as it may by law provide, to form States to be admitted into the Confederacy. In all such territory the institution of negro slavery, as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected by Congress and by the Territorial government; and the inhabitants of the several Confederate States and Territories shall have the right to take to such Territory any slaves lawfully held by them in any of the States or Territories of the Confederate States." [emphasis added].

"Vice-President" Alexander Stevens gives the lie to the myth that the rebellion was not "about" slavery:

"The new [rebel] Constitution has put at rest forever all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institutions-African slavery as it exists among us-the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson, in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the “rock upon which the old Union would split.” He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact. But whether he fully comprehended the great truth upon which that rock stood and stands, may be doubted. The prevailing ideas entertained by him and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old Constitution were, that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with; but the general opinion of the men of that day was, that, somehow or other, in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away. This idea, though not incorporated in the Constitution, was the prevailing idea at the time. The Constitution, it is true, secured every essential guarantee to the institution while it should last, and hence no argument can be justly used against the constitutional guarantees thus secured, because of the common sentiment of the day. Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the idea of a Government built upon it-when the 'storm came and the wind blew, it fell.'

Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and moral condition. This, our new Government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth. This truth has been slow in the process of its development, like all other truths in the various departments of science. It is so even amongst us. Many who hear me, perhaps, can recollect well that this truth was not generally admitted, even within their day. The errors of the past generation still clung to many as late as twenty years ago. Those at the North who still cling to these errors with a zeal above knowledge, we justly denominate fanatics. All fanaticism springs from an aberration of the mind; from a defect in reasoning. It is a species of insanity. One of the most striking characteristics of insanity, in many instances, is, forming correct conclusions from fancied or erroneous premises; so with the anti-slavery fanatics: their conclusions are right if their premises are. They assume that the negro is equal, and hence conclude that he is entitled to equal privileges and rights, with the white man…. I recollect once of having heard a gentleman from one of the Northern States, of great power and ability, announce in the House of Representatives, with imposing effect, that we of the South would be compelled, ultimately, to yield upon this subject of slavery; that it was as impossible to war successfully against a principle in politics, as it was in physics or mechanics. That the principle would ultimately prevail. That we, in maintaining slavery as it exists with us, were warring against a principle-a principle founded in nature, the principle of the equality of man. The reply I made to him was, that upon his own grounds we should succeed, and that he and his associates in their crusade against our institutions would ultimately fail. The truth announced, that it was as impossible to war successfully against a principle in politics as well as in physics and mechanics, I admitted, but told him it was he and those acting with him who were warring against a principle. They were attempting to make things equal which the Creator had made unequal.

. . .

The negro by nature, or by the curse against Canaan, is fitted for that condition which he occupies in our system. The architect, in the construction of buildings, lays the foundation with the proper material-the granite-then comes the brick or the marble. The substratum of our society is made of the material fitted by nature for it, and by experience we know that it is the best, not only for the superior but for the inferior race, that it should be so. It is, indeed, in conformity with the Creator. It is not for us to inquire into the wisdom of His ordinances or to question them. For His own purposes He has made one race to differ from another, as He has made “one star to differ from another in glory.”[emphasis added].

Frank Moore, ed., Rebellion Record: A Diary of American Events, with Documents, Narratives, Illustrative Incidents, Poetry, etc. Volume I, (New York: 1861), 45-46.

South Carolina said in rebelling:

"A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the States north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery. He is to be entrusted with the administration of the common Government, because he has declared that that “Government cannot endure permanently half slave, half free,” and that the public mind must rest in the belief that slavery is in the course of ultimate extinction. This sectional combination for the submersion of the Constitution, has been aided in some of the States by elevating to citizenship, persons who, by the supreme law of the land [sic] , are incapable of becoming citizens; and their votes have been used to inaugurate a new policy, hostile to the South, and destructive of its beliefs and safety." [emphasis added]

Louisiana:

"The people of the slave holding States are bound together by the same necessity and determination to preserve African slavery."

Alabama:

"Therefore it is that the election of Mr. Lincoln cannot be regarded otherwise than a solemn declaration, on the part of a great majority of the Northern people, of hostility to the South, her property and her institutions—nothing less than an open declaration of war—for the triumph of this new theory of Government destroys the property of the South, lays waste her fields, and inaugurates all the horrors of a San Domingo servile insurrection, consigning her citizens to assassinations, and. her wives and daughters to pollution and violation, to gratify the lust of half-civilized Africans."

Texas:

"...in this free government all white men are and of right ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights; that the servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations; while the destruction of the existing relations between the two races, as advocated by our sectional enemies, would bring inevitable calamities upon both and desolation upon the fifteen slave-holding states...."

Jefferson Davis:

"You too know, that among us, white men have an equality resulting from a presence of a lower caste, which cannot exist where white men fill the position here occupied by the servile race. The mechanic who comes among us, employing the less intellectual labor of the African, takes the position which only a master-workman occupies where all the mechanics are white, and therefore it is that our mechanics hold their position of absolute equality among us."

Stephen F. Hale, Commissioner of the "Confederate Government, to Governor Beriah Magoffin of  Kentucky after the election of Lincoln:

"If the policy of the Republicans is carried out, according to the programme indicated by the leaders of the party, and the South submits, degradation and ruin must overwhelm alike all classes of citizens in the Southern States. The slave-holder and non-­slave-holder must ultimately share the same fate—all be degraded to a position of equality with free negroes, stand side by side with them at the polls, and fraternize in all the social relations of life; or else there will be an eternal war of races, desolating the land with blood, and utterly wasting and destroying all the resources of the country."

Senator Senator Albert Gallatin Brown of Mississippi:

"I want Cuba, and I know that sooner or later we must have it. If the worm-eaten throne of Spain is willing to give it for a fair equivalent, well—if not, we must take it. I want Tamaulipas, Potosi, and one or two other Mexican States; and I want them all for the same reason—for the planting and spreading of slavery.

And a footing in Central America will powerfully aid us in acquiring those other states. It will render them less valuable to the other powers of the earth, and thereby diminish competition with us. Yes, I want these countries for the spread of slavery. I would spread the blessings of slavery, like the religion of our Divine Master, to the uttermost ends of the earth, and rebellious and wicked as the Yankees have been, I would even extend it to them."

General John Singleton Mosby, the "Gray Ghost", on "The Lost Cause":  “I’ve never heard of any other cause than slavery,”

The U.S. Constitution, to its shame, allowed chattel slavery.  The change in the Constitution that corrected that historic wrong, outlawed slavery throughout the United States.  Lincoln did less by degree ("Proclamation") and even that less was of dubious legality, as was his suspension of Habeas Corpus and nearly Wilsonesque suppression of free speech.

 

The treason of the rebel leaders is not a close question.  Article III of the Constitution defines treason as follows: "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort."  Did Lee, Davis, and the rest make war on the United States?  They did, expressly, starting with firing on Fort Sumter. Former rebels served well and honorably after their defeat.  Joe Wheeler and Longstreet come to mind.  So did former German generals and scientists.  Pragmatism rules in human affairs.  Many of those who now denounce the Wall once demanded it when the American working class and their unions demanded it and their votes were the great prize.  That was then.  Millions of immigrant votes now beckon as union membership declines.  Uncle Joe was our buddy when there were German soldiers to be killed.  None of which changes a single fact, the Lost Cause myth to the contrary notwithstanding. 

Myths have great power.  The was no fog in London on the day of the Unknown Scout's "Good Turn."  "The beads" were found on a dead female by the side of a trail.  Scouting celebrated it''s 100th anniversary in the U.S. in 2008.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 2, 2019 by TAHAWK

[TAHAWK]

The other Georgia:

https://sputniknews.com/world/20131231186124958-Vandalized-Stalin-Statue-Torn-Down-in-Georgia/

 

 

Edited December 2, 2019 by TAHAWK

[ianwilkins]

On 11/30/2019 at 4:55 AM, yknot said:

Baden Powell was also an avowed fascist. He admired Hitler's youth movement and called Mein Kampf  a "wonderful book". 

Let's have that diary quote in full shall we? You know, so that no-one misrepresents history or anything...  "Lay up all day. Read Mein Kampf. A wonderful book, with good ideas on education, health, propaganda, organisation etc. – and ideals which Hitler does not practise himself."

 

[Eagle94-A1]

Also if BP was an avowed fascist, A) why would he petition to get the German Scout associations out from under the Hitler Youth, and B ) why was he on the Nazi's most wanted list if OPERATION SEA LION would have occurred and successful?

[ianwilkins]

29 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

Also if BP was an avowed fascist, A) why would he petition to get the German Scout associations out from under the Hitler Youth, and B ) why was he on the Nazi's most wanted list if OPERATION SEA LION would have occurred and successful?

Is it because

A) he was not a fascist, and

B) he was not a fascist.

Imperialist I'll give you, at least in his early years. At some point he said this...

"We should take care, in inculcating patriotism into our boys and girls, that is a patriotism above the narrow sentiment which usually stops at one’s country, and thus inspires jealousy and enmity in dealing with others… Our patriotism should be of the wider, nobler kind which recognises justice and reasonableness in the claims of others and which lead our country into comradeship with…the other nations of the world. The first step to this end is to develop peace and goodwill within our borders, by training our youth of both sexes to its practice as their habit of life, so that the jealousies of town against town, class against class and sect against sect no longer exist; and then to extend this good feeling beyond our frontiers towards our neighbours.”

Sorry, I don't know the source. Pretty sure we can weigh that as "not very fascist" though.

 

[Eagle94-A1]

@ianwilkins, I thought it was because he was a sneaky son of a gun of an intelligence officer who caused panic  German Intel folks during WWI. Abwer were seriously concerned about him, evan at his age.