Hate Groups: White Supremacists, Neo-Nazis, the Alt-Right...

[96583UP]

“Ethno-nationalism—it's losers. It's a fringe element. I think the media plays it up too much, and we gotta help crush it, you know, uh, help crush it more. These guys are a collection of clowns.”

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Em_UOEnvQpQJ:prospect.org/article/steve-bannon-unrepentant&num=1&strip=0&vwsrc=0

[Bi_3]

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2017/08/16/jackson-washington-park-protest-presidents-slave-owners/

Unsure what to think here. I believe history should be judged in context of the events, but if things get renamed all time for dumbed reasons than this.

[Green Habit]

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2017/08/16/jackson-washington-park-protest-presidents-slave-owners/

Unsure what to think here. I believe history should be judged in context of the events, but if things get renamed all time for dumbed reasons than this.

I'm all for stripping Andrew Jackson from names of things for many reasons in addition to slavery.

[digster]

Asking out of ignorance; is there an analogue somewhere else in the world where the instigators of a civil war that tried to break up the country are venerated to the degree Civil War figures are? Sure, it's concentrated in the South, but it's a nationwide thing. Do other countries lionize traitorous characters and moments in their history the way we do? Even stepping back from the emotion, and with the knowledge that the memorials were often being utilized as a tool of terror when they were being established in the Deep South, it's nevertheless a bizarre concept.

[malice]

Asking out of ignorance; is there an analogue somewhere else in the world where the instigators of a civil war that tried to break up the country are venerated to the degree Civil War figures are? Sure, it's concentrated in the South, but it's a nationwide thing. Do other countries lionize traitorous characters and moments in their history the way we do? Even stepping back from the emotion, and with the knowledge that the memorials were often being utilized as a tool of terror when they were being established in the Deep South, it's nevertheless a bizarre concept.

i don't know the answer but im guessing no if only because this country made slavery a huge part or its development for how long? Over 400 years? And then continued persecution of 'not white' people for the last century regardless of the end of slavery
It's part of the culture and always will be, the effects of our history i mean.

Is there any other country still in existence today that has a similar history?

[Bi_3]

Asking out of ignorance; is there an analogue somewhere else in the world where the instigators of a civil war that tried to break up the country are venerated to the degree Civil War figures are? Sure, it's concentrated in the South, but it's a nationwide thing. Do other countries lionize traitorous characters and moments in their history the way we do? Even stepping back from the emotion, and with the knowledge that the memorials were often being utilized as a tool of terror when they were being established in the Deep South, it's nevertheless a bizarre concept.

Scotland?

[McParadigm]

Asking out of ignorance; is there an analogue somewhere else in the world where the instigators of a civil war that tried to break up the country are venerated to the degree Civil War figures are? Sure, it's concentrated in the South, but it's a nationwide thing. Do other countries lionize traitorous characters and moments in their history the way we do? Even stepping back from the emotion, and with the knowledge that the memorials were often being utilized as a tool of terror when they were being established in the Deep South, it's nevertheless a bizarre concept.

How many civil wars elsewhere were fought during the initial growth spurts of creating a nation where none had previously existed? Involving an officer class that had just won a war for the country? At a time when military officers could be major cultural figureheads? Where neither side represented an ambition to "take over" (install a military dictator, overthrow a king, etc)? Where 1 in 25 of all men are killed during the course of the war? Where the war ended with a desperate attempt by a fledgling, weak country to heal and ignore grievances? Where the military leader for the opposition force was allowed to serve as president of a premier military college after surrendering?

The whole sitch was weird.

[Norris]

Ireland's civil war was pretty complicated too, and there's still love for the losing side.

[Norris]

Probably less love than a generation or two ago, but still.

[Bi_3]

Asking out of ignorance; is there an analogue somewhere else in the world where the instigators of a civil war that tried to break up the country are venerated to the degree Civil War figures are? Sure, it's concentrated in the South, but it's a nationwide thing. Do other countries lionize traitorous characters and moments in their history the way we do? Even stepping back from the emotion, and with the knowledge that the memorials were often being utilized as a tool of terror when they were being established in the Deep South, it's nevertheless a bizarre concept.

How many civil wars elsewhere were fought during the initial growth spurts of creating a nation where none had previously existed? Involving an officer class that had just won a war for the country? At a time when military officers could be major cultural figureheads? Where neither side represented an ambition to "take over" (install a military dictator, overthrow a king, etc)? Where 1 in 25 of all men are killed during the course of the war? Where the war ended with a desperate attempt by a fledgling, weak country to heal and ignore grievances? Where the military leader for the opposition force was allowed to serve as president of a premier military college after surrendering?

The whole sitch was weird.

"So far from engaging in a war to perpetuate slavery, I am rejoiced that slavery is abolished. I believe it will be greatly for the interests of the South. So fully am I satisfied of this, as regards Virginia especially, that I would cheerfully have lost all I have lost by the war, and have suffered all I have suffered, to have this object attained.". -Lee

I wish I knew more on this topic. It's so much more complicated than just 'slavery'. But that is no excuse for the existence of memorials that were constructed from n the 20th century as symbols of domination.

[Strat]

Asking out of ignorance; is there an analogue somewhere else in the world where the instigators of a civil war that tried to break up the country are venerated to the degree Civil War figures are? Sure, it's concentrated in the South, but it's a nationwide thing. Do other countries lionize traitorous characters and moments in their history the way we do? Even stepping back from the emotion, and with the knowledge that the memorials were often being utilized as a tool of terror when they were being established in the Deep South, it's nevertheless a bizarre concept.

How many civil wars elsewhere were fought during the initial growth spurts of creating a nation where none had previously existed? Involving an officer class that had just won a war for the country? At a time when military officers could be major cultural figureheads? Where neither side represented an ambition to "take over" (install a military dictator, overthrow a king, etc)? Where 1 in 25 of all men are killed during the course of the war? Where the war ended with a desperate attempt by a fledgling, weak country to heal and ignore grievances? Where the military leader for the opposition force was allowed to serve as president of a premier military college after surrendering?

The whole sitch was weird.

"So far from engaging in a war to perpetuate slavery, I am rejoiced that slavery is abolished. I believe it will be greatly for the interests of the South. So fully am I satisfied of this, as regards Virginia especially, that I would cheerfully have lost all I have lost by the war, and have suffered all I have suffered, to have this object attained.". -Lee

I wish I knew more on this topic. It's so much more complicated than just 'slavery'. But that is no excuse for the existence of memorials that were constructed from n the 20th century as symbols of domination.

Geeneral Lee's views on slavery feel a bit wishy washy.

"The blacks are immeasurably better off here than in Africa, morally, physically, and socially. The painful discipline they are undergoing is necessary for their further instruction as a race, and will prepare them, I hope, for better things"

[Norris]

If you read what all the states were saying at the time of secession, you'll see it was absolutely about slavery and almost nothing else. It's telling that when you ask for other reasons they're usually "states rights" or "economic differences". Both of those reasons are also slavery.

Last edited by Norris on Thu August 17, 2017 5:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[philpritchard]

Asking out of ignorance; is there an analogue somewhere else in the world where the instigators of a civil war that tried to break up the country are venerated to the degree Civil War figures are? Sure, it's concentrated in the South, but it's a nationwide thing. Do other countries lionize traitorous characters and moments in their history the way we do? Even stepping back from the emotion, and with the knowledge that the memorials were often being utilized as a tool of terror when they were being established in the Deep South, it's nevertheless a bizarre concept.

How many civil wars elsewhere were fought during the initial growth spurts of creating a nation where none had previously existed? Involving an officer class that had just won a war for the country? At a time when military officers could be major cultural figureheads? Where neither side represented an ambition to "take over" (install a military dictator, overthrow a king, etc)? Where 1 in 25 of all men are killed during the course of the war? Where the war ended with a desperate attempt by a fledgling, weak country to heal and ignore grievances? Where the military leader for the opposition force was allowed to serve as president of a premier military college after surrendering?

The whole sitch was weird.

"So far from engaging in a war to perpetuate slavery, I am rejoiced that slavery is abolished. I believe it will be greatly for the interests of the South. So fully am I satisfied of this, as regards Virginia especially, that I would cheerfully have lost all I have lost by the war, and have suffered all I have suffered, to have this object attained.". -Lee

I wish I knew more on this topic. It's so much more complicated than just 'slavery'. But that is no excuse for the existence of memorials that were constructed from n the 20th century as symbols of domination.

I have a pretty limited knowledge of American history, but every word of that quote reads as someone saving face after losing by claiming to have supported the goals of the other side all along.

[McParadigm]

There are rather a lot of personal letters surviving major Confederate figures showing conflicting (or sometimes negative) views on slavery. Those views were not shared by the southern public.

Ultimately they weren't unlike today's Republicans...they were on average more educated and less racist than their base, but felt a loyalty greater than country that kept them from addressing it.

Today, that loyalty is to party. In the 1860's, people saw themselves as being loyal to their state first and foremost, above nation or president. Wherever goes Virginia, so too goes Robert Lee.

[Norris]

So at best they were morally repugnant cowards.

[McParadigm]

The irony is that only rich, educated folk like Robert Lee owned any slaves.

[Norris]

The second lowest class on the social ladder is often the cruelest to the lowest.

[McParadigm]

Also, keep in mind that the north tried to downplay the slavery/emancipation issue throughout the early years of the war...because it wasn't popular. People watching their friends and family die fighting against states who defended slavery turned the public tide, enough for the Emancipation to be Proclomated.

For states that had seceded only of course. Gotta tip toe around those border states.

[digster]

Probably less love than a generation or two ago, but still.

Definitely, I'm sure there's a lot of love and romantic idealization for soldiers in those conflicts, as still remains with the Confederacy. It would just surprise me if there were IRA statues in the institution analogous to the U.S. Capitol for Ireland. It's the physical ideation of having all these memorials and statues that I find odd, both in amount and that they are so prominent, not necessarily the fact that people might look back on those moments fondly.

[Norris]

Another complication there is the leader of the losing anti-treaty IRA forces in the civil war ended up President of the Republic afterwards.