Confederate Memorial Hall deemed offensive

[Guest Cancer Marney]

"The name has stirred debate on campus since Vanderbilt renovated Confederate Memorial Hall in 1988. Some black students refused to set foot there."

CNN story

 

This is unbelievably silly. The memories of the Confederate dead deserve to be honoured even if they were on the wrong side, and if the UDC contributed a third of the building costs, they have every right to demand that the Hall's name remain unchanged.

[Guest kkktookmybabyaway]

Ahhh, good ol' campus diversity. Makes me glad I keep my $ in my pocket and not put it in the coffers of the academia institutions...

[Guest papacita]

I agree that it's stupid. Firstly, changing the name really doesn't change the fact that the building was built in honor of the Confederacy, and it's not like anyone's forcing the students to honor the soldiers anyway. This is just a case of people being overly sensitive.

[Guest EricMM]

The same story gets told again and again and again.

 

If white people proteseted having things named after black people because of Turner's Rebellion, then it'd be "wrong" but protesting the confederates is "right". It's not like most confederates were slave owners. The North profited from slavery just as much as the south did.

 

In the end what the confederates did was not good for the Union, but it was pretty necessary. There was waaaaay too much pressure.

[Guest Retro Rob]

The North profited from slavery just as much as the south did.

IIRC, the north didn't really benefit at all because of slavery. There were few slaves in the north, maybe 10,000 in New York, whereas Virgina had over 400,000. Because of the 3/5 Compromise, every slave was counted as 3/5 of a person when it came down to deciding how many representatives each state would have in the house. Therefore, if anything, slavery hurt the northern states A LOT and greatly helped the southern states when it came to representation in the government, which was a very big deal in the late-1700's.

[Guest Some Guy]

The North was more industrial while the South was agricultural, so the North had far less use for slaves than the South. Most slaves in the North were house slaves and treated reasonably well, whereas the Southern slaves generally worked outside on plantations and were treated worse. And lets not forget who decided slavery was a bad idea.

 

The South profited way more from it than the North and as such didn't want to give up such cheap labor (they did have to feed and buy them, so it wasn't free labor). I have a feeling that if the North had more use for them then the Civil War may not have happened and slavery would have been abolished much later, but who knows?

 

Oh yeah changing the name of this building is stupid. They have MLK Streets all over the place and I'm sure that the racists find that offesnive, why don't they matter. Aren't we looking for tolerance and diversity?

[Guest godthedog]

in the south, something like this could only happen in a college. everywhere else is teeming with streets and landmarks named after confederacy advocates.

[Guest EricMM]

I meant that the North benefited because due to the south's cheap labor, the south was able to sell their raw materials for less, which is what the North needed. If not for the Souths Cotton, the North's Industry would have been less profitable than it was.

 

I'm not trying to say more than that, the North was still against slavery, and ended it etc, but it DID profit from it.

[Guest MrRant]

Boo-Hoo

[Guest Ripper]

You know...its time for all of the confederate supporters to accept something. Supremist, and hate groups have ruined the confederate flag and the confederacy for them...get over it. Nazi germany had a history before it envolved killing a lot of Jewish people...but the Holocaust ruined it...you just have to adjust and move on. If someone was wanting a college to change the name of a building from the Nazi Memorial Hall even though Nazi's donated money to build it, I doubt anyone would see it as ridicuolous.

 

The confederate flag has widely used as a symbol of hate for well over a century now...it represented the enslavement of a people... I understand there is another history behind but so the fuck what. Millions of Nazi soldiers died for thier cause...the wrong cause...and I don't see the massive support of Nazi Germany. Nazis are not only part of the history of Germany, they also represent the darkest moment in the countries history, just as the Confederacy represent the darkest thing in our countries history.

 

Now you will never see me giving too much of a crap about a confederate flag or buildings being anywhere, but if someone has a problem with it, you have to see where there aregument can be made and I have yet to see a argument for the preservation of all things confederate in the south out weighing the opposing view.

 

"If white people proteseted having things named after black people because of Turner's Rebellion, then it'd be "wrong" but protesting the confederates is "right". "

 

I hope you aren't saying that Turners Rebellion makes everything even in regards to slavery. If someone tried to make that argument I really do hope you see why they would be morons.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Because of the 3/5 Compromise, every slave was counted as 3/5 of a person when it came down to deciding how many representatives each state would have in the house.  Therefore, if anything, slavery hurt the northern states A LOT and greatly helped the southern states when it came to representation in the government, which was a very big deal in the late-1700's.

 

The 3/5ths thing was designed to hurt the southern states - the Founders wanted to abolish slavery and denying the slave-holding states greater representation was their way of ensuring eventual abolition. The "3/5 Compromise" was a strike against the dehumanisation of blacks, not for it. And the vast majority of the Confederate soldiers weren't fighting for slavery, even though that is, ultimately, what they were doing - immediately, they were fighting for their country and their families, and they fought gallantly, as officers and as gentlemen. They fought without hope in a terrible War against impossible odds. And their courage demands respect.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

"Sleep sweetly in your humble graves,

Sleep, martyrs of a fallen cause;

Though yet no marble column craves

The pilgrim here to pause.

 

In seeds of laurel in the earth

The blossom of your fame is blown,

And somewhere, waiting for its birth,

The shaft is in the stone!

 

Meanwhile, behalf the tardy years,

Which keep in trust your storied tombs,

Behold! your sisters bring their tears,

And these memorial blooms.

 

Small tributes! but your shades will smile

More proudly on these wreaths to-day,

Than when some cannon-moulded pile

Shall overlook this bay.

 

Stoop, angels, thither from the skies!

There is no holier spot of ground

Than where defeated valor lies,

By mourning beauty crowned."

 

- Henry Timrod, Ode at Magnolia Cemetery

 

 

 

 

 

Deo vindice

[Guest MarvinisaLunatic]

I got fed up with this whole situation after spending 2 years in South Carolina. As far as I was concerned, the South has just as much right to honor the Confederate soldiers who died as the North does to honor the Union soldiers who died. The whole business of the Confederate Flag being disprespectful is garbage too. Whether some groups of people like it or not, the Confederate Flag represents an important part of the history of not only the South, but our Country as a whole.

[Guest Edwin MacPhisto]

Therefore, if anything, slavery hurt the northern states A LOT and greatly helped the southern states when it came to representation in the government, which was a very big deal in the late-1700's.

 

Quite wrong. You've got something on the political representation point, but in a very limited context. The industrialized North acquired the vast majority of its raw materials from the South. There was a distinct sectional split over the issue of slavery, but again, the vast majority of those in the North did not want to abolish slavery.

 

Abolition was a small movement. The Civil War was not fought with the purpose of ending slavery altogether. The Republican interest at the time (remember, back in the mid-19th century, roles were flip-flopped; Democrats were the conservatives, whereas Republicans were the new rising opposition/rights party) was in preserving the as of yet unsettled territory for *white men.* Northerners were not saints; they, out of self-interest, wanted to halt the expansion of slavery, gradually eliminating slavery. Lincoln's original plan was to have slavery gradually faded out by 1960.

 

That's not a typo. 1960. One hundred years. Only the events of the war forced him to go ahead with the emancipation proclamation.

 

Someone else says:

The South profited way more from it than the North and as such didn't want to give up such cheap labor (they did have to feed and buy them, so it wasn't free labor). I have a feeling that if the North had more use for them then the Civil War may not have happened and slavery would have been abolished much later, but who knows?

 

Way more? Using the South's created resources, the Northern United States was, at the time, the #2 economy in the world. The South was #4. This wasn't a matter of giving up cheap labor; it was matter of immediately destroying the entire infrastructure on which the Southern economy was based. Reconstruction was not a walk in the park, man.

 

I am in no way trying to defend slavery as an institution, but you have to understand that in this time frame, it was not considered morally wrong by the majority of people--not even the Northern majority, who saw slavery as a functional problem at best. The Northerners are often made out as the saints of the Civil War, fighting to free blacks above all other interests against the evil South.. That's bullshit.

 

Everyone wanted a Union. The eventual confederates were essentially forced into a position where they could do nothing but secede. Go back and look at the papers. Inspect the Valley of the Shadow project, one of the most detailed resources on the Civil War and the times surrounding it. When people voted for Abraham Lincoln in the election of 1860, they did not know they were voting for war. No one wanted war, and to say that those who fought in this war on either side shouldn't be memorialized is cruel and unacceptable.

[Guest Ripper]

"The whole business of the Confederate Flag being disprespectful is garbage too. Whether some groups of people like it or not, the Confederate Flag represents an important part of the history of not only the South, but our Country as a whole. "

 

Um...no..it isn't garbage. The flag itself was being flown by supremist after the war who would kill the them freed slaves and since then has been widely used as the symbol of multiple hate groups. There is a rich history behind the flag and the confederacy, true, but the misuse of the flag by the wrong people has made it a symbol of hate and it is perfectly understandable that someone would be upset by it.

 

Bottom line... the confederate soilders fought on the wrong side and they lost. Tough shit. Japanese soldiers were doing what they thought was valient and noble at Pearl Harbor and died in the attack. I don't see anyone routing for a memorial to those soilders lost. Hitlers soilders fought valiently for what they believed was right...but it wasn't... they lost and its a damn good thing they did.

 

It is a damn good thing that the Confederate lost the war because they were fighting for something pretty damn evil. So they fought valiently...so they fought bravely... they fought for the wrong side and lost just as every other country that fought against us at one point, yet this foe who fought for the wrong side is supposed to be praised thier flag still flown over public buildings? Screw that.

 

Peoples children were being forced to salute the thing right next to the American flag, as if they stood for the same thing. You honestly can't see how a ancestor of a slave wouldn't be pissed that the flag of a someone that fought to keep his ancestors enslaved is being held in the same regard as the US flag. Really...think about it.

 

You want to praise the confedate army and past in your own private sectors, fine. I have yet to hear anyone say anything about places like The Confederacy Museums here in the south and such or street names named after confederate heros. They are there for people who wish to see the history behind it to witness it. But having it on state flags, flying over schools and naming buildings after in schools is different. You can't force a history on people. People should have the ability to avoid it if they want.

[Guest MrRant]

Why would we create a memorial in this country for another countries soldiers who attacked us? No logic there buddy.

[Guest danielisthor]

I have yet to hear anyone say anything about places like The Confederacy Museums here in the south and such or street names named after confederate heros.

the foremost word there is yet. give it time and they will. There is already movements to remove the pictures and the names of our great forefathers like George Washington and Thomas Jefferson from public buildings because the were slave owners.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Bottom line... the confederate soilders fought on the wrong side and they lost.  Tough shit.  Japanese soldiers were doing what they thought was valient and noble at Pearl Harbor... Hitlers soilders fought valiently for what they believed was right...but it wasn't...

Are you out of your fucking mind? Are you seriously comparing the Confederacy to Hitler and Japanese kamikazes? NO ONE in this thread has argued against the fact that

It is a damn good thing that the Confederate [sic] lost the war

but to put the Confederate soldiers on the same moral plane as the monsters responsible for the Bataan death march and Auschwitz is completely insane.

 

yet this foe who fought for the wrong side is supposed to be praised thier flag still flown over public buildings

And when the hell did this come into the discussion? Flying a Confederate flag over a state capitol is wrong, pure and simple. But, once again, this isn't ABOUT that.

having it on state flags, flying over schools and naming buildings after in schools is different.  You can't force a history on people.  People should have the ability to avoid it if they want

People should have the ability to avoid history? Why? Please, explain to me why ignorance is a good thing. Or should I just take Chris Rock's word for it that "Niggaz looove to not know. Nothin' make a nigga happier than not knowin' the answer to yo' question?" The Confederate flag flying over a public building funded by taxpayer dollars, versus a memorial hall in a private university, a third of the cost of which was paid for by descendants of the Confederacy - and you're saying these cases are the same? Are you high?

 

"What's the capital of Zaire?"

"Man, I don't know dat shit! Keepin' it real!"

"Hey man, I got out of school!"

"So what, bitch? Yo' punk-ass bitch! Don't come 'round wit' all dat readin' an' shit! Don't come 'round wit' all dat countin'! Shit, I can count too: one two fo' five... you count dese rocks, biyatch!"

"Hey man, I got my Master's degree!"

"Yeah? So, what, you my masta now? I'm s'posed to listen to yo' punk-ass? So what you got your Masta's degree? So what you got a muthafuckin' Masta's degree? Yo' da smarty-art nigga, huh? Yo' da smarty-art nigga? Lemme ax yo' dis. Lemme ax yo' dis. Can you kick my ass?"

[Guest ant_7000]

Why do people always quote Chris Rock all the time when he is NOT that funny?

[Guest Edwin MacPhisto]

I think it's because, in addition to being pretty funny, he's very often speaking the truth, or at least some sort smart social criticism.

 

Then again, he was in Lethal Weapon 4, so I don't know how much credit we can really give him...

[Guest Slapnuts00]

The great thing about Chris Rock is he says things that people are thinking but white or black, no one would ever being able to say out loud.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Chris Rock is bloody hilarious.

 

"Too much food in America. We've got too much food! We've got so much food that we're allergic to it. Hungry people ain't allergic to shit. What, you think anybody in Rwanda's got a fucking lactose intolerance?"

 

"Niggas always want some credit for shit they supposed to do. A nigger will brag about some shit a normal man just does.

'I take care of my kids.'

You're supposed to, you dumb motherfucker! What kind of ignorant shit is that?

'I ain't never been to jail.'

Whaddaya want, a cookie?!"

 

"Don't you smoke crack or you won't never be nothin'."

"I could be Mayor!"

[Guest Ace309]

I hope you aren't saying that Turners Rebellion makes everything even in regards to slavery. If someone tried to make that argument I really do hope you see why they would be morons.

 

Uh, no, jackass. Either you're unfamiliar with the idea of context, or you're shoving a tape recorder into a straw dummy.

 

He was using Turner's Rebellion as an example of something widely regarded as "bad," much like the Civil War, and saying that if a small minority wanted to honor those who participated in Turner's Rebellion, they would be dismissed.

 

Please try not to read into a statement a sentiment that isn't there.

[Guest Ripper]

"Are you out of your fucking mind? Are you seriously comparing the Confederacy to Hitler and Japanese kamikazes?"

 

No and Yes. I am comparing Nazi SOILDERS and Japanese kamikazes to the Conderate soilders. They all believed in deeply and fought for a cause that they believed was right although it wasn't.

 

"but to put the Confederate soldiers on the same moral plane as the monsters responsible for the Bataan death march and Auschwitz is completely insane."

 

But to put the Condederate cause on the same plane is not insane at all. in the end it comes down to men fighting to keep the enslavement of a people into action. Millions lost thier lives because of the slavery on the trip over here alone, not to mention the lives lost due to shoddy treatment, the tearing apart of families, and many unspeakable injustices to them. Yes...I do put the monsters responsible of Auschwitz in the same light as the monsters responsible for and fought for the the up holding of slavery.

 

QUOTE

yet this foe who fought for the wrong side is supposed to be praised thier flag still flown over public buildings

 

"And when the hell did this come into the discussion? Flying a Confederate flag over a state capitol is wrong, pure and simple. But, once again, this isn't ABOUT that."

 

from this statement: "The whole business of the Confederate Flag being disprespectful is garbage too. Whether some groups of people like it or not, the Confederate Flag represents an important part of the history of not only the South, but our Country as a whole. "

 

"People should have the ability to avoid history? Why? Please, explain to me why ignorance is a good thing. Or should I just take Chris Rock's word for it that "Niggaz looove to not know. Nothin' make a nigga happier than not knowin' the answer to yo' question?" The Confederate flag flying over a public building funded by taxpayer dollars, versus a memorial hall in a private university, a third of the cost of which was paid for by descendants of the Confederacy - and you're saying these cases are the same? Are you high?"

 

I am a firm believer that if you want to teach history, at least let it be true. I don't know if you have ever been to the south, but the whole Civil War is in a different light down here. Down here, aparently no one in the confederacy was fighting for slavery... aparently the mean ol north wanted to take their land and they were all just farmers fighting for it. Slaves?? What Slaves?? I swear to God that I took a entire year of Alabama history in grade school and not once was " they were fighting to keep slavery as a institution" ever came up.

 

I can remember distinctly going to the Little House of the Confederacy in Montgomery Alabama on a field trip and after a day of hearing about these confederate heros they gave us all little confederate flags. It wasn't until my brother saw me waving it around that he took me to the library to hear the entire story.

 

I said all that...damn that was alot...to say this... Creating this fake little mistique of the heroic south is a very unfair representation of what really happend. They were fighting for the worst injustice in this nations history. If people are insulted by the celebration of these men, I don't think they are being silly. They are VERY VERY justified.

 

"Why would we create a memorial in this country for another countries soldiers who attacked us? No logic there buddy. "

 

Well if you want to get specific, the Confederacy was not a part of this country so soilders from a another country attacking is are being memorialized...buddy.

[Guest Ripper]

I hope you aren't saying that Turners Rebellion makes everything even in regards to slavery. If someone tried to make that argument I really do hope you see why they would be morons.

 

Uh, no, jackass. Either you're unfamiliar with the idea of context, or you're shoving a tape recorder into a straw dummy.

 

He was using Turner's Rebellion as an example of something widely regarded as "bad," much like the Civil War, and saying that if a small minority wanted to honor those who participated in Turner's Rebellion, they would be dismissed.

 

Please try not to read into a statement a sentiment that isn't there.

Well, Jackass, if you read post, he was turning it into a racial thing by saying that:

 

"If white people proteseted having things named after black people because of Turner's Rebellion, then it'd be "wrong" but protesting the confederates is "right"."

 

It actually seems more like him just saying that it is a big deal because black people talking about white people again. I really don't see how the hell you got what you read into it unless you completely rewrite the statement. Of course you probably didn't even read what he wrote and said "Hey, I can call somebody names...I better post!!"

[Guest Edwin MacPhisto]

I am a firm believer that if you want to teach history, at least let it be true.

 

Take your own advice, Ripper.

 

I will again post this link for you: the Valley of the Shadow Project. You don't even have to go pick up a book. It's all right there for you. Go read primary sources--newspapers from communities on either end of the sectional conflict before, during, and after the war.

 

No one here is trying to defend slavery. Not everyone who fought for the South was fighting to preserve slavery. They were fighting to, for various reasons, create their own American nation. Slavery was one reason, but there's even more in a growing hatred of the Republican party, a rising distrust of Abraham Lincoln on ALL matters, not just slavery...you're pigeonholing an entire group into one heading.

 

You're right to see slavery as a horrible thing, cause it was, but don't attribute feelings to people who never had them.

 

Interesting sidenote to think about: I don't think that there is conceiveably a way for the United States to arrive at the position we're at right now without slavery. It may have been an awful, awful institution, but we owe a lot of progress to slavery and the economic potential it brought about. A bit chilling, that.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

I really don't see how the hell you got what you read into it unless you completely rewrite the statement.

I got the exact same thing out of Eric's statement that Ace309 did. And yes, I read the post. It's perfectly clear and it doesn't need to be rewritten. Let's review:

If white people proteseted having things named after black people because of Turner's Rebellion, then it'd be "wrong" but protesting the confederates is "right".

I hope you aren't saying that Turners Rebellion makes everything even in regards to slavery. If someone tried to make that argument I really do hope you see why they would be morons.

He was using Turner's Rebellion as an example of something widely regarded as "bad," much like the Civil War, and saying that if a small minority wanted to honor those who participated in Turner's Rebellion, they would be dismissed.

Please try not to read into a statement a sentiment that isn't there.

 

Seems lucid enough to me. White-bashing is fine, Eric said, but black-bashing isn't. Every stupid, insignificant white group in history can be trumpeted as irrefutable proof of the racism of the entire white population as a whole, but if you criticise anything a stupid, insignificant black group ever did, you're a racist yourself. This corrupt, self-serving attitude expects white people to apologise endlessly, black people to be eternal victims, and both to be forever at odds. And I'm sick of it. I refuse to judge the moral value of any action by the skin colour of he who acts.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

I am comparing Nazi SOILDERS and Japanese kamikazes to the Conderate soilders.  They all believed in deeply and fought for a cause that they believed was right although it wasn't.

The Confederate soldiers were not fighting for slavery. Over 90% of the South owned no slaves at all at the time of the Civil War, the vast majority of slaveholders owned fewer than 5 slaves, and many Southerners were abolitionists. The Confederacy tried to secede in order to keep slaves, but the soldiers who fought against the Union were not evil and they were not fighting for an evil cause. How many of the rank and file owned slaves, do you think? How about the officers? Less than 2%. What about the free black men who enlisted in the Confederate army? There's a memorial to one of them in my state. You want to tell me he was fighting for slavery as well? What about General Ulysses S Grant? He flat-out refused to free his slaves, but he fought for the Union. Was he a "monster?" Will you bless him regardless of his actions because his uniform was blue, or damn him regardless of his actions because his skin was white?

The fact is that the Confederates simply did not commit systematic atrocities in the way Japanese and the Germans did in the Second World War. Your comparison is stupid, inaccurate, ignorant, and obscene.

 

"And when the hell did this come into the discussion? Flying a Confederate flag over a state capitol is wrong, pure and simple. But, once again, this isn't ABOUT that."

from this statement:  "The whole business of the Confederate Flag being disprespectful is garbage too. Whether some groups of people like it or not, the Confederate Flag represents an important part of the history of not only the South, but our Country as a whole. "

Kindly re-examine the post you're quoting. There is NOTHING in it about flying anything over a public building of any kind; no one in this thread has ever advocated that. As usual, you're attacking a straw man.

 

I don't know if you have ever been to the south

I have an aunt in Louisiana to whom I'm very close, and our family fought in the Revolution, the Civil War (on the wrong side), both World Wars, Korea, Vietnam, and in many other places, so yes, I have.

 

the whole Civil War is in a different light down here... I swear to God that I took a entire year of Alabama history in grade school and not once was " they were fighting to keep slavery as a institution" ever came up.

I'm sorry your teachers taught you bad history. I'm sorry you were told lies. I'm sorry you believed them. But that isn't an argument in support of your position. It is an argument for educational reform.

 

If people are insulted by the celebration of [Confederate heroes], I don't think they are being silly.  They are VERY VERY justified.

Bullshit. There's a difference between a memorial dedicated to the almost 300,000 men and women who were killed by bullets, swords, disease, starvation, and heartbreak, and the ridiculous celebration of slavery that you posit. Once again a straw man. Your argument is nonsense from beginning to end; you can't defend it honestly, so you ignore everyone else's position and invent stupid lies to attack. Because you can't answer the truth.

[Guest bob_barron]

Wasn't Robert E. Lee against slavery?

 

I thought I heard that once

[Guest danielisthor]

Wasn't Robert E. Lee against slavery?

 

I thought I heard that once

Robert E. Lee took command of the southern armies because he could not raise a gun against a fellow Virginian. had Virginia joined the North, General Lee would have led the Northern Army against the south.

 

Learned this on my tour of Arlington National Cemetary 2 years ago, which by the way was owned by Robert E. Lee who married into the family of General and President George Washington. Gen. Lee lost the property during the war because he failed to pay his property tax, because you had to go and pay it in person. Kind of hard to do when your running a war campaign.