Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Lafayette Advertiser)   The city of Memphis votes to rename three city parks that honored the Confederacy and its leaders, including one named after the founder of the KKK. Sadly, even in this day and age, some people have a problem with that   (theadvertiser.com ) divider line
    More: Interesting, KKK, Confederacy, Memphis, Sons of Confederate Veterans, diamond, Jefferson Davis Park  
•       •       •

7042 clicks; posted to Main » on 06 Feb 2013 at 1:59 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



589 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2013-02-06 05:55:23 PM  

Mrtraveler01: George Babbitt:
The Articles of Confederation which were the precursor to the U.S. Constitution had an article that stated "Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled." and provides the necessary insight for proper interpretation of the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that goes "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." It was always the intent of the Framers of the Constitution that the U.S. would be a collection of sovereign states working together for their mutual benefit.

You know the Articles of Confederation was different from the US Constitution and failed because it made the Federal Government so weak it couldn't do anything and as a result anything involving 2 or more states could never get accomplished.

Yes it was originally the intent of the framers of this country to be a loose Federation of different states but the Constitution was actually created manipulated to give the Federal Government more power because the United States under the Articles of Confederation couldn't function at all.


FTFY
 
2013-02-06 05:56:19 PM  
Wait, aren't ALL American's racist and didn't they invent revisionist history? I can see why this would be a conflicted decision.

If Northern US bigots refer to southerners as racists for not helping them revise their shared history I'm sure they won't mind being called racist themselves by Canadians. It's not like the Underground Railroad ended at the Mason-Dixon Line.
 
2013-02-06 05:56:50 PM  

DougTaupe: George Babbitt: DougTaupe:

If I laid claim to my neighbors' pool and start shooting when he refused to leave, I doubt anyone would say he started the fight nor would they refer to the pool as mine.

Automatically disqualified for use of strawman.

You must be a troll. No one could be so obtuse.

To quote Lisa Simpson: No, it's not it's apt. APT!


The pool is not on your property. Fort Sumter was newly on South Carolina only property.
 
2013-02-06 05:58:35 PM  
George Babbitt:

The Articles of Confederation which were the precursor to the U.S. Constitution had an article that stated "Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled." and provides the necessary insight for proper interpretation of the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that goes "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." It was always the intent of the Framers of the Constitution that the U.S. would be a collection of sovereign states working together for their mutual benefit.

This is whole nother can of worms. One argument against your idea goes (from Wiki):

By adopting a constitution-rather than a treaty, or a compact, or an instrument of confederacy, etc-that created a new body of government designed to be senior to the several states, and by approving the particular language and provisions of that new Constitution, the framers and voters made it clear that the fates of the individual states were (severely) changed; and that the new United States was: Not a "league", however firm; not a "confederacy" or a "confederation"; not a compact on among "sovereign' states" - all these high profile and legally freighted words from the Articles were conspicuously absent from the Preamble and every other operative part of the Constitution. The new text proposed a fundamentally different legal framework.

So I'll stand by my point that Sumter was on US land, with US troops and property in it, and that the only people that recognized the Confederacy as a sovereign nation were the Confederates themselves.
 
2013-02-06 05:59:56 PM  

Philip Francis Queeg: dukwbutter: danfrank: Abraham Lincoln owned slaves? Please provide a citation for that, because I think you're full of shiat.

Git some!!!  You freaking liberal yankees are getting a full does of truth today.  Sucks.  Nothing like what you learned in the history books, is it?  OMG they lied to me in school. Doh!  Suck it libtards!

http://www.dixiescv.org/slavery.html

Wow is that link full of absolute shiat.


And yet even it doesn't say Lincoln owned any slaves.
 
2013-02-06 06:00:56 PM  
Philip Francis Queeg:
The Articles of Confederation also stated:


And we do further solemnly plight and engage the faith of our respective constituents, that they shall abide by the determinations of the united states in congress assembled, on all questions, which by the said confederation are submitted to them. And that the articles thereof shall be inviolably observed by the states we respectively represent, and that the union shall be perpetual. In Witness whereof, we have hereunto set our hands, in Congress. Done at Philadelphia, in the State of Pennsylvania, the ninth Day of July, in the Year of our Lord one Thousand seven Hundred and Seventy eight, and in the third year of the Independence of America.


Being well learned students of history, do you really think they believed that the U.S. would last until Kingdom come?

Ben Franklin is reported as saying moments after being a part of the formation of the U.S., he was asked by a woman "Well, Doctor, what have we got-a Republic or a Monarchy?"  "A Republic, if you can keep it."
 
2013-02-06 06:01:38 PM  

George Babbitt: danfrank: George Babbitt: The Jay Treaty(Great Britain) and the Treaty of Amity and Commerce(France) would like to have a word with you.

Huh?

Jay Treaty - signed in 1794.
Treaty of Amity Commerce w/France - signed in 1778

What am I missing?

You said "Neither did Britain or France for that matter."


I still don't get it. I said neither Britain or France recognized the Confederates as a sovereign nation. You said that those treaties proved me wrong. How do those treaties, signed 70 - 80 years before secession, recognize the Confederate States as a sovereign nation?
 
2013-02-06 06:02:52 PM  

SMB2811: All2morrowsparTs: dukwbutter: That's right. Everyone can be proud of their heritage. Except for Southerners.  That seems fair, right?

You celebrate treason as heritage?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4th_of_july


They don't celebrate 4th of July in England.  You want to celebrate the confederacy, go do it someplace where the confederates weren't considered traitors. Here is the USA, the rebs are traitors.

U-S-A, U-S-A,  U-S-A,  U-S-A,  U-S-A,  U-S-A,  U-S-A!!!
 
2013-02-06 06:04:10 PM  

CheekyMonkey: dukwbutter: CheekyMonkey: A good point for a different discussion. It, however, doesn't address my original question, unless you're trying to say that subjugating Africans was OK by virtue of the fact that we'd already subjugated the Native Americans.

CheekyMonkey, you seem to miss somehow that the North had slaves also.  Not only that, but the Civil war wasn't about slavery.  Lincoln told the South they could keep their slaves if they'd just stay in the Union.  Also, the Emancipation freed only the slaves in the South, not the Slaves in the North. The more you know. ;)

Not really so cheeky now are we?  More like a politically correct fool.

Nope.  Didn't miss it.  My original question still stands:  Since Southern "pride" is forever being proffered as an excuse for holding onto things like the Confederate flag, what, exactly, are these people proud of?


Actually the antebellum south did have things to be proud of I'm sure, but the basis of their largely agrarian society, slavery, should not be one of them. While it's true that some northern states also had slavery, they were also becoming more economically based on industrialization. Slavery as an institution was dying a natural death. If the South had concentrated on industrialization and infrastructure, as they would have had to do to compete with the northern states economically, slavery would have gone into a decline there as well.
 
2013-02-06 06:04:12 PM  
You know, I live 5 minutes away from the Memphis city limits...yes, in Mississippi (Lord help me, right?) and I love it here.  Is it perfect?  Hell no but I'd be willing to bet that where you live has issues as well.  I know everytime I see a Fark headline about Memphis, I can expect to see two things:  1.  Lots of herpa derpa doo about the Civil War (but, but slavery *cosmic eyeroll) and 2.  Dro and his shoulder chip are going to make an appearance.

Yeah, there's a crime problem.  Yeah, there are some racial problems.  Yeah, there are economic and social problems and probably less of all the above than where many of you live.  I am the only white person in my whole office.  My boss and all of my coworkers are black and we all get along great.  Who would've thought that was even possible in the dirty South?  I mean, Southerners are racist, backwards thinking rednecks who only know how to drink beer and talk about the Civil War, right?  Is everybody that lives in Memphis going to love it?  Again, hell no...but there are those of us who do.  Why?  The people are pretty great actually.  I can spend the day in town and hear everyone I meet say, "Hey y'all".  Thank you"  "Yes ma'am".  "Have a great day".  Or maybe I hear those things because that's the way I speak to everyone I see.

Believe it or not, all of us don't care about reliving the Civil War.  Many of us just enjoy living in Memphis because of the music, the barbecue, the sweet tea, the riverboat rides, the zoo, Graceland, Beale Street (during the day), riding the sky rail to Mud Island, and on and on ad nauseum.  Nobody is making anybody live here, visit here or even drive through here.  If you don't like Memphis, stay your ass at home where everything is far superior.
 
2013-02-06 06:05:39 PM  

danfrank: George Babbitt: danfrank: George Babbitt: The Jay Treaty(Great Britain) and the Treaty of Amity and Commerce(France) would like to have a word with you.

Huh?

Jay Treaty - signed in 1794.
Treaty of Amity Commerce w/France - signed in 1778

What am I missing?

You said "Neither did Britain or France for that matter."

I still don't get it. I said neither Britain or France recognized the Confederates as a sovereign nation. You said that those treaties proved me wrong. How do those treaties, signed 70 - 80 years before secession, recognize the Confederate States as a sovereign nation?


Thought you were referring to the recognition of the U.S. by those countries. My bad, hold please. I remember there is something about Britain giving support and aid to the South, I can't remember how much more there was to that.
 
2013-02-06 06:06:04 PM  
Most Americans are so ignorant about history, they probably wouldn't even know who those people are.

/Only half-kidding
 
2013-02-06 06:08:24 PM  
quiet_american: xander450: quiet_american: The irrationality in this thread is really depressing.

Everyone comments as though ... no other viewpoint than theirs is correct.
...
Yet people in here have this tyrant's attitude ... to just swallow the mainstream version of history uncritically and then try to barf it back in soundbites to validate whatever center-left political action is taken.

Ok, now fun thought experiment:  read the two statements above (shortened for brevity). See the problem? Hint: I bolded the key words.


If I wanted to answer in the same fashion as you:
1) All I see is your arrogance and condescending attitude.
2) Well, that and your grammatical mistakes. "now fun thought"
3) Hint: you're an asshole who isn't as smart as he thinks he is

Instead, my central point is the same: this kind of back and forth is a waste of time. Most of the people here are intelligent, and yet we let ourselves fall into this kind of empty discourse. Instead of validating the status quo, let's let people have their monuments, and let others in power tear them down, and have an exchange of ideas that isn't just little childish parries of insults and lame attempts to be funny through soundbites.


Gosh, you moved awfully quickly from "can't we all get along" to "you're an asshole." Meaning no (further) offense, but that might be why there's a shortage of intelligent discourse.

And the point I attempted to make (arrogantly, condescendingly, and with poor grammar because I'm a fantastic asshole who isn't as smart as he thinks he is) is that the first and last paragraphs of your original post are contradictory: the first was a call to civility and the last was a swipe at "center-left" liberalism.

That is all.
 
2013-02-06 06:09:10 PM  

Trixie212: You know, I live 5 minutes away from the Memphis city limits...yes, in Mississippi (Lord help me, right?) and I love it here.  Is it perfect?  Hell no but I'd be willing to bet that where you live has issues as well.  I know everytime I see a Fark headline about Memphis, I can expect to see two things:  1.  Lots of herpa derpa doo about the Civil War (but, but slavery *cosmic eyeroll) and 2.  Dro and his shoulder chip are going to make an appearance.

Yeah, there's a crime problem.  Yeah, there are some racial problems.  Yeah, there are economic and social problems and probably less of all the above than where many of you live.  I am the only white person in my whole office.  My boss and all of my coworkers are black and we all get along great.  Who would've thought that was even possible in the dirty South?  I mean, Southerners are racist, backwards thinking rednecks who only know how to drink beer and talk about the Civil War, right?  Is everybody that lives in Memphis going to love it?  Again, hell no...but there are those of us who do.  Why?  The people are pretty great actually.  I can spend the day in town and hear everyone I meet say, "Hey y'all".  Thank you"  "Yes ma'am".  "Have a great day".  Or maybe I hear those things because that's the way I speak to everyone I see.

Believe it or not, all of us don't care about reliving the Civil War.  Many of us just enjoy living in Memphis because of the music, the barbecue, the sweet tea, the riverboat rides, the zoo, Graceland, Beale Street (during the day), riding the sky rail to Mud Island, and on and on ad nauseum.  Nobody is making anybody live here, visit here or even drive through here.  If you don't like Memphis, stay your ass at home where everything is far superior.


Thanks.

/waves from downtown
 
2013-02-06 06:10:31 PM  

Trixie212: I am the only white person in my whole office


Watch out, somebody is going to accuse you of saying, "hey, some of my best friends are black!" This is FARK, for God's sake.
 
2013-02-06 06:10:47 PM  

George Babbitt: Philip Francis Queeg:
The Articles of Confederation also stated:


And we do further solemnly plight and engage the faith of our respective constituents, that they shall abide by the determinations of the united states in congress assembled, on all questions, which by the said confederation are submitted to them. And that the articles thereof shall be inviolably observed by the states we respectively represent, and that the union shall be perpetual. In Witness whereof, we have hereunto set our hands, in Congress. Done at Philadelphia, in the State of Pennsylvania, the ninth Day of July, in the Year of our Lord one Thousand seven Hundred and Seventy eight, and in the third year of the Independence of America.

Being well learned students of history, do you really think they believed that the U.S. would last until Kingdom come?

Ben Franklin is reported as saying moments after being a part of the formation of the U.S., he was asked by a woman "Well, Doctor, what have we got-a Republic or a Monarchy?"  "A Republic, if you can keep it."


Well they stated that the union was Perpetual, and made no provision for any state ever leaving the union.

In addition the Northwest Territories Ordinance, which was referenced as the basis for organizing all of the territories into states, had this to say:

The said territory, and the States which may
be formed therein, shall forever remain a part of
this confederacy of the United States of Amer-
ica,
subject to the Articles of Confederation, and
to such alterations therein as shall be constitu-
tionally made; and to all the acts and ordi-
nances of the United States in Congress assem-
bled, conformable thereto. The inhabitants and
settlers in the said territory shall be subject to
pay a part of the Federal debts, contracted, or to
be contracted, and a proportional part of the ex-
penses of government to be apportioned on them
by Congress, according to the same common
rule and measure by which apportionments
thereof shall be made on the other States; and
the taxes for paying their proportion shall be
laid and levied by the authority and direction of
the legislatures of the district, or districts, or
new States, as in the original States, within the
time agreed upon by the United States in Con-
gress assembled. The legislatures of those dis-
tricts, or new States, shall never interfere with
the primary disposal of the soil by the United
States in Congress assembled,
nor with any reg-
ulations Congress may find necessary for secur-
ing the title in such soil to the  bona fide pur-
chasers.


This law, with identical language was passed both by the Congress under the Articles of Confederation and under the Constitution.

The Union is perpetual. Secession was illegal. This is fact, not a matter of opinion.
 
2013-02-06 06:11:29 PM  

scumshine: Trixie212: You know, I live 5 minutes away from the Memphis city limits...yes, in Mississippi (Lord help me, right?) and I love it here.  Is it perfect?  Hell no but I'd be willing to bet that where you live has issues as well.  I know everytime I see a Fark headline about Memphis, I can expect to see two things:  1.  Lots of herpa derpa doo about the Civil War (but, but slavery *cosmic eyeroll) and 2.  Dro and his shoulder chip are going to make an appearance.

Yeah, there's a crime problem.  Yeah, there are some racial problems.  Yeah, there are economic and social problems and probably less of all the above than where many of you live.  I am the only white person in my whole office.  My boss and all of my coworkers are black and we all get along great.  Who would've thought that was even possible in the dirty South?  I mean, Southerners are racist, backwards thinking rednecks who only know how to drink beer and talk about the Civil War, right?  Is everybody that lives in Memphis going to love it?  Again, hell no...but there are those of us who do.  Why?  The people are pretty great actually.  I can spend the day in town and hear everyone I meet say, "Hey y'all".  Thank you"  "Yes ma'am".  "Have a great day".  Or maybe I hear those things because that's the way I speak to everyone I see.

Believe it or not, all of us don't care about reliving the Civil War.  Many of us just enjoy living in Memphis because of the music, the barbecue, the sweet tea, the riverboat rides, the zoo, Graceland, Beale Street (during the day), riding the sky rail to Mud Island, and on and on ad nauseum.  Nobody is making anybody live here, visit here or even drive through here.  If you don't like Memphis, stay your ass at home where everything is far superior.

Thanks.

/waves from downtown


You're welcome.

/gets sick of this crap
//waves back from Desoto County
 
2013-02-06 06:13:15 PM  

TerminalEchoes: VendorXeno: GoldSpider: "Those who fail to learn erase the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them."

There it is again. Seriously, how much mercury do you have to eat to think that changing a street sign is erasing history? Talk about a total loss of perspective...

Sorry, I agree with GoldSpider. I LIVE in Memphis and this is a stupid idea. Good or bad, the Civil War did happen. It's part of history. It's part of who we are today. It's stupid to try and erase the dark spots. Accept them and move on.


Shelby Foote, Tennessee Williams, Morgan Freeman, Aretha Franklin, Elvis (Hell, innumerable musicians). Lots of wonderful folks associated with the history of Memphis, which covers more than the first half of the 1860's.

Put what you want in your town; the culture is what the locals make of it. Personally, I admire Edinburgh's plethora of statues of writers.

/southerner, descendant of rebels
//ok with that history too
 
2013-02-06 06:14:01 PM  

oh_please: Trixie212: I am the only white person in my whole office

Watch out, somebody is going to accuse you of saying, "hey, some of my best friends are black!" This is FARK, for God's sake.


Sincerely don't give a large ripping damn

/not aimed at you
 
2013-02-06 06:15:45 PM  

Philip Francis Queeg: George Babbitt: Philip Francis Queeg:
The Articles of Confederation also stated:


And we do further solemnly plight and engage the faith of our respective constituents, that they shall abide by the determinations of the united states in congress assembled, on all questions, which by the said confederation are submitted to them. And that the articles thereof shall be inviolably observed by the states we respectively represent, and that the union shall be perpetual. In Witness whereof, we have hereunto set our hands, in Congress. Done at Philadelphia, in the State of Pennsylvania, the ninth Day of July, in the Year of our Lord one Thousand seven Hundred and Seventy eight, and in the third year of the Independence of America.

Being well learned students of history, do you really think they believed that the U.S. would last until Kingdom come?

Ben Franklin is reported as saying moments after being a part of the formation of the U.S., he was asked by a woman "Well, Doctor, what have we got-a Republic or a Monarchy?"  "A Republic, if you can keep it."

Well they stated that the union was Perpetual, and made no provision for any state ever leaving the union.

In addition the Northwest Territories Ordinance, which was referenced as the basis for organizing all of the territories into states, had this to say:

The said territory, and the States which may
be formed therein, shall forever remain a part of
this confederacy of the United States of Amer-
ica, subject to the Articles of Confederation, and
to such alterations therein as shall be constitu-
tionally made; and to all the acts and ordi-
nances of the United States in Congress assem-
bled, conformable thereto. The inhabitants and
settlers in the said territory shall be subject to
pay a part of the Federal debts, contracted, or to
be contracted, and a proportional part of the ex-
penses of government to be apportioned on them
by Congress, according to the same common
rule and measure by which apportionments
thereof sh ...


The point was made earlier by danfrank that "Not a "league", however firm; not a "confederacy" or a "confederation"; not a compact on among "sovereign' states" - all these high profile and legally freighted words from the Articles were conspicuously absent from the Preamble and every other operative part of the Constitution."

Yet here, in this official ordinance, the U.S. does refer to itself as a confederacy.
 
2013-02-06 06:16:17 PM  

CheekyMonkey: Cortez the Killer: CheekyMonkey: dukwbutter: That's right. Everyone can be proud of their heritage. Except for Southerners.  That seems fair, right?

Remind me again what they have to be proud of?  I mean, aside for the systematic subjugation, oppression and dehumanization of a group of people with darker skin, of course...

[www.smokymtbarbecue.com image 800x600]

Yup.  Regional food is really the only thing I could think of.  The funny thing is, most of what constitutes "Southern food" is actually slave food.


Well, music and literature immediately spring to mind. Blues, jazz, bluegrass, rock and roll all have deep southern roots, and before anyone says it, yes some of those roots were white. Literatue ranging from Lanier, Twain, Faulkner to H.S. Thompson are inspired for better or worse by the south. There's a ton of others...
 
2013-02-06 06:18:44 PM  
danfrank:
I still don't get it. I said neither Britain or France recognized the Confederates as a sovereign nation. You said that those treaties proved me wrong. How do those treaties, signed 70 - 80 years before secession, recognize the Confederate States as a sovereign nation?

You're right, it seems it never came to fruition, though it appears it came darn close, and the opinion of foreign observers would lend validity to the credibility of the Confederacy being more than a rebellion.
 
2013-02-06 06:19:26 PM  

George Babbitt: danfrank:
I still don't get it. I said neither Britain or France recognized the Confederates as a sovereign nation. You said that those treaties proved me wrong. How do those treaties, signed 70 - 80 years before secession, recognize the Confederate States as a sovereign nation?

You're right, it seems it never came to fruition, though it appears it came darn close, and the opinion of foreign observers would lend validity to the credibility of the Confederacy being more than a rebellion.


EDIT:

source for that --> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confederate_States_of_America#Diplomacy
 
2013-02-06 06:19:49 PM  

hdhale: Nabb1: KenShabby: Nabb1: oldfarthenry: Ya know - I "could" point out that the star-spangled banner was a poem about a war you guys LOST!

/tries to deflect heat off them-there southern folk

You could, but you'd be wrong.

Yeah, that was the War of 1812.

Yes, he brings that up a lot. A whole lot. I expect him to post a pic of Canadian soldiers burning the White House any moment now.

The War of 1812 was essentially a draw, though the Americans achieved some decisive victories against native tribes in the South and Midwest, on Lake Erie, and against British raids at Baltimore and New Orleans.  More importantly, British backing of native tribes in the US ended and that had a major impact on the Indian Wars in what was then the far west and elsewhere.  The British on the other hand lost influence and never threatened the US again, though they did see fit to arm the Confederates from time to time.

A lot is made of the invasion of Canada from New York, and how the Americans failed to take Canada, but in reality the US simply did not bring its 'A' game to the fight and it showed.  Our best commanders were in the west and the south.  As for the forrays of the British into the US, the raid on Washington was just that, a raid.  Not even the British commander in his wet dreams could image taking Washington and holding it and forcing the US to surrender.

FYI: The raid on Washington was motivated by the Americans burning of what would become Toronto (the capital of Upper Canada).  It was carried by British regulars not their Canadian colonial allies.

Canadians like to thump their chest about how they "whipped the Americans", but in reality without the British fleet, British resources, and British troops and armaments, you'd all eating Dunkin' Donuts not Tim Hortons, your alphabet would end in ZEE not ZED, and a maple leaf would be found on a maple tree or laying on the ground waiting for a rake.


Case in point for revisionist history above. Next would come the " impressment" falicy (that continued after the war). Madison called them Canadians, those soldiers settled and their bloodlines are inseparably meshed with Canada dumbass :) Unless of course you want to say George Washinton wasn't American. Then I guess we're good. Then it's just my daddy beat up your daddy. Don't kid yourself about the 'a' game though. Those were not the British Empire's battle hardened troops that repelled the U S invaders. It was the people of Canada who massively outnumbered repelled the largest US army ever assembled to that point. Britain was frankly amazed.

One thing is undisputed. First Nations peoples came out of that war for the worst. :(
 
2013-02-06 06:22:52 PM  

xander450: quiet_american: xander450: quiet_american: The irrationality in this thread is really depressing.

Everyone comments as though ... no other viewpoint than theirs is correct.
...
Yet people in here have this tyrant's attitude ... to just swallow the mainstream version of history uncritically and then try to barf it back in soundbites to validate whatever center-left political action is taken.

Ok, now fun thought experiment:  read the two statements above (shortened for brevity). See the problem? Hint: I bolded the key words.


If I wanted to answer in the same fashion as you:
1) All I see is your arrogance and condescending attitude.
2) Well, that and your grammatical mistakes. "now fun thought"
3) Hint: you're an asshole who isn't as smart as he thinks he is

Instead, my central point is the same: this kind of back and forth is a waste of time. Most of the people here are intelligent, and yet we let ourselves fall into this kind of empty discourse. Instead of validating the status quo, let's let people have their monuments, and let others in power tear them down, and have an exchange of ideas that isn't just little childish parries of insults and lame attempts to be funny through soundbites.

Gosh, you moved awfully quickly from "can't we all get along" to "you're an asshole." Meaning no (further) offense, but that might be why there's a shortage of intelligent discourse.

And the point I attempted to make (arrogantly, condescendingly, and with poor grammar because I'm a fantastic asshole who isn't as smart as he thinks he is) is that the first and last paragraphs of your original post are contradictory: the first was a call to civility and the last was a swipe at "center-left" liberalism.

That is all.


And now you presume to know my beliefs. You presume that I don't share those beliefs. You can be critical of people who espouse your own beliefs when they do so awkwardly, poorly and frankly so arrogantly and judgmentally.

To further extend my central point: relying on scoring little political points is just a tire, it's a bore and a chore. And the groupthink is bad, and accepted uncritically. The first 100 posts display that better than I can describe.

You're striving to make some point about irony. I'm talking about the quality of the conversation, and respecting actual differences and worldviews.
 
2013-02-06 06:23:28 PM  

George Babbitt: The point was made earlier by danfrank that "Not a "league", however firm; not a "confederacy" or a "confederation"; not a compact on among "sovereign' states" - all these high profile and legally freighted words from the Articles were conspicuously absent from the Preamble and every other operative part of the Constitution."

Yet here, in this official ordinance, the U.S. does refer to itself as a confederacy.


Which it states is perpetual, and that the States have no right to change primary disposal of the lands.
 
2013-02-06 06:32:50 PM  

Philip Francis Queeg: George Babbitt: The point was made earlier by danfrank that "Not a "league", however firm; not a "confederacy" or a "confederation"; not a compact on among "sovereign' states" - all these high profile and legally freighted words from the Articles were conspicuously absent from the Preamble and every other operative part of the Constitution."

Yet here, in this official ordinance, the U.S. does refer to itself as a confederacy.

Which it states is perpetual, and that the States have no right to change primary disposal of the lands.


I return to my supposition that the framers had no prideful dreams of the one-upping the eternal city.
 
2013-02-06 06:39:54 PM  
quiet_american: And now you presume to know my beliefs. You presume that I don't share those beliefs. You can be critical of people who espouse your own beliefs when they do so awkwardly, poorly and frankly so arrogantly and judgmentally.

I'd like to extend an apology - I could have written that Boobies much more politely than I did.

Alex
 
2013-02-06 06:41:19 PM  

hdhale: Nabb1: KenShabby: Nabb1: oldfarthenry: Ya know - I "could" point out that the star-spangled banner was a poem about a war you guys LOST!

/tries to deflect heat off them-there southern folk

You could, but you'd be wrong.

Yeah, that was the War of 1812.

Yes, he brings that up a lot. A whole lot. I expect him to post a pic of Canadian soldiers burning the White House any moment now.

The War of 1812 was essentially a draw, though the Americans achieved some decisive victories against native tribes in the South and Midwest, on Lake Erie, and against British raids at Baltimore and New Orleans.  More importantly, British backing of native tribes in the US ended and that had a major impact on the Indian Wars in what was then the far west and elsewhere.  The British on the other hand lost influence and never threatened the US again, though they did see fit to arm the Confederates from time to time.

A lot is made of the invasion of Canada from New York, and how the Americans failed to take Canada, but in reality the US simply did not bring its 'A' game to the fight and it showed.  Our best commanders were in the west and the south.  As for the forrays of the British into the US, the raid on Washington was just that, a raid.  Not even the British commander in his wet dreams could image taking Washington and holding it and forcing the US to surrender.

FYI: The raid on Washington was motivated by the Americans burning of what would become Toronto (the capital of Upper Canada).  It was carried by British regulars not their Canadian colonial allies.

Canadians like to thump their chest about how they "whipped the Americans", but in reality without the British fleet, British resources, and British troops and armaments, you'd all eating Dunkin' Donuts not Tim Hortons, your alphabet would end in ZEE not ZED, and a maple leaf would be found on a maple tree or laying on the ground waiting for a rake.


Much of what you say is correct, sorta. The horseshiat about the invasion attempts not being the "A" game smacks of revisionist sour grapes in a large way. The americans were repulsed primarily by native and Canadian troops. Most of the Brits at that point were busy in Europe.
Of course we had the support of the British. We were a semi independent colony at the time.
You are absolutely correct in that the raid on Washington was a British action, not Canadian.
The success against the natives in several campaigns was by no means always decisive, but numbers and technology won out, paving the way for "Manifest Destiny". Not a heritage without its very considerable dark side. Finally, the Battle of New Orleans, for which many Americans hold such (militarily justified) pride was a tragic mistake on both parts as the war was already over when it occurred. It had no strategic value whatsoever. So, yeah. History is inevitably biased, but you might try reading some of the history written by the other side and by third party observers. It helps with the whole balanced viewpoint. Essentially the war was a draw. The US failed in its territorial ambitions, but succeeded on its trade ambitions. Ironically it would have gotten those anyway with the war in Europe ending. In the end the war was utterly pointless.
 
2013-02-06 06:41:42 PM  
what in the hell?! Fark turns "post" into "Boobies"?!? Why??
 
2013-02-06 06:42:11 PM  

Trixie212: You know, I live 5 minutes away from the Memphis city limits...yes, in Mississippi (Lord help me, right?) and I love it here.


The only thing I ever thought was good about Memphis was Memphis in May. I did some serious partying during a couple of those.
 
2013-02-06 06:43:46 PM  
Greylight: Case in point for revisionist history above. Next would come the " impressment" falicy (that continued after the war). Madison called them Canadians, those soldiers settled and their bloodlines are inseparably meshed with Canada dumbass :) Unless of course you want to say George Washinton wasn't American. Then I guess we're good. Then it's just my daddy beat up your daddy. Don't kid yourself about the 'a' game though. Those were not the British Empire's battle hardened troops that repelled the U S invaders. It was the people of Canada who massively outnumbered repelled the largest US army ever assembled to that point. Britain was frankly amazed.

One thing is undisputed. First Nations peoples came out of that war for the worst. :(

 You're right in that a high proportion of troops were not British regulars, but Canadians, both militia and Canadian Fencible troops (units formed and trained to British army standard from Canadian volunteers, serving in North America).
The most humiliating moment for the Americans, though, was the Battle of Chateauguay, where American regulars led, if you could call it that, by General Hampton, were unable to take a position held by half their number of troops, and these were almost entirely Canadian militia and Mohawk troops, led by a French-Canadian officer.
To be fair, though, a large number of Americans were against that war, and many folks in the New England states called it "Madison's War" and continued doing business with both the Brits and the Canadians throughout.
 
2013-02-06 06:45:57 PM  

xander450: what in the hell?! Fark turns "post" into "Boobies"?!? Why??


You've been on fark for 5 years?
 
2013-02-06 06:47:38 PM  

xander450: what in the hell?! Fark turns "post" into "Boobies"?!? Why??


Only if the word that precedes it is "first"
 
2013-02-06 06:47:44 PM  

George Babbitt: danfrank: George Babbitt: The Jay Treaty(Great Britain) and the Treaty of Amity and Commerce(France) would like to have a word with you.

Huh?

Jay Treaty - signed in 1794.
Treaty of Amity Commerce w/France - signed in 1778

What am I missing?

You said "Neither did Britain or France for that matter."


Neither of those documents had anything to do with the CSA unless someone had a time machine.
 
2013-02-06 06:49:26 PM  

jigger: xander450: what in the hell?! Fark turns "post" into "Boobies"?!? Why??

You've been on fark for 5 years?


...and in all that time, not once have I typed "Boobies" (sans periods). Until now.
 
2013-02-06 06:49:50 PM  

NallTWD: Noam Chimpsky: There are still US cities named after British royalty.

The Brits are still friends to America.  The south is not.


huh? Da fuq ?
 
2013-02-06 06:50:12 PM  
God damn it.  hahahaha
 
2013-02-06 07:04:40 PM  

NallTWD: Noam Chimpsky: There are still US cities named after British royalty.

The Brits are still friends to America.  The south is not.


Who the hell do you think is being annoying as hell while in line for the Eiffel Tower?

Oh wait, that's ALL OF US. Finally something that brings Americans together
 
2013-02-06 07:05:35 PM  

Mike_1962: George Babbitt: danfrank: George Babbitt: The Jay Treaty(Great Britain) and the Treaty of Amity and Commerce(France) would like to have a word with you.

Huh?

Jay Treaty - signed in 1794.
Treaty of Amity Commerce w/France - signed in 1778

What am I missing?

You said "Neither did Britain or France for that matter."

Neither of those documents had anything to do with the CSA unless someone had a time machine.


You missed some, please see here:


George Babbitt:
 
2013-02-06 07:08:29 PM  

xander450: jigger: xander450: what in the hell?! Fark turns "post" into "Boobies"?!? Why??

You've been on fark for 5 years?

...and in all that time, not once have I typed "Boobies" (sans periods). Until now.


Explained here:

http://www.fark.com/farq/farkisms/#z.22Boobies.22_time_warp
 
2013-02-06 07:14:09 PM  

George Babbitt: George Babbitt: danfrank:
I still don't get it. I said neither Britain or France recognized the Confederates as a sovereign nation. You said that those treaties proved me wrong. How do those treaties, signed 70 - 80 years before secession, recognize the Confederate States as a sovereign nation?

You're right, it seems it never came to fruition, though it appears it came darn close, and the opinion of foreign observers would lend validity to the credibility of the Confederacy being more than a rebellion.

EDIT:

source for that --> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confederate_States_of_America#Diplomacy


Did you actually read your reference? It explicitly states that no nation recognized the CSA as sovereign. France and England accorded it belligerent status. A diplomatic way of saying they recognize the 'at war' status but don't take sides.
 
2013-02-06 07:19:46 PM  

jigger: Trixie212: You know, I live 5 minutes away from the Memphis city limits...yes, in Mississippi (Lord help me, right?) and I love it here.

The only thing I ever thought was good about Memphis was Memphis in May. I did some serious partying during a couple of those.


That indeed was a glorious time. Multiple stage venues for different music all going at once, plus BBQ and booze! Hell yeah.
 
2013-02-06 07:20:31 PM  
Mike_1962:


I am according you belligerent status.
 
2013-02-06 07:21:43 PM  

oh_please: I'm not sure where I stand on this.

I can't really blame Memphis for doing this from a PR and PC angle, since the names of the parks seem to glorify things that people nowadays don't really see as noble and name-worthy.

On the other hand, it seems that our society has a tendency to whitewash everything, and instead of dealing with our history, and making it a talking/teaching point, It's easier to rename the parks rather than explain why these parks were named, and the history behind the people.


That's how I feel in these situations generally, too. There seems to be a pretty thin line at times between acknowledging something and glorifying it.
 
2013-02-06 07:23:23 PM  

George Babbitt: Mike_1962:


I am according you belligerent status.


Lol.
 
2013-02-06 07:26:23 PM  

Fano: jigger: Trixie212: You know, I live 5 minutes away from the Memphis city limits...yes, in Mississippi (Lord help me, right?) and I love it here.

The only thing I ever thought was good about Memphis was Memphis in May. I did some serious partying during a couple of those.

That indeed was a glorious time. Multiple stage venues for different music all going at once, plus BBQ and booze! Hell yeah.


Except when it's raining, right?
 
2013-02-06 07:27:34 PM  

George Babbitt: danfrank:
I still don't get it. I said neither Britain or France recognized the Confederates as a sovereign nation. You said that those treaties proved me wrong. How do those treaties, signed 70 - 80 years before secession, recognize the Confederate States as a sovereign nation?

You're right, it seems it never came to fruition, though it appears it came darn close, and the opinion of foreign observers would lend validity to the credibility of the Confederacy being more than a rebellion.


Yes, had they been recognized, it would have been a big deal. But they weren't, and Lincoln made damn sure of it.
 
2013-02-06 08:02:37 PM  
Soooooo a people lose a war, and are labeled by people acting from behind the security of the intrawebs as being traitors, bad, evil, etc, while forgetting that this country was founded by traitors, whom were also slave owners.


Ahhhh hmmmmm.

Unwilling black servants in my Founding Fathers house? It's more likely than you think.

Look, the people voted, I know it's a strange concept for what appears to be most of the mudrakers here on FARK, but this is what is known as "Democracy", aka: You can't always get your way, little one.

Of course one doesn't except people online to actually think, especially on FARK, or anywhere else that sports are discussed. Competition, despite our best efforts to evolve, is one aspect of our species some low-brow (and sloped foreheaded) folks are unwilling to part with. I'm bigger, better, faster, smarter than you and whatever it is you like.
 
2013-02-06 08:21:13 PM  
Since everyone else is piling on I guess I will too...

Those of you that think the South has not culture or history to be proud of, and those of you who think Southern culture and history is defined by what white slaveowners did, should go get a room. You guys are idiots.

I grew up in the South, in Texas and Florida. Admittedly Florida is only 1/2 Southern, at least in Tampa Bay, but still. I would like to remind everyone here that blues, jazz, and rock and roll all originated in the South. Memphis, of all places, has plenty of things it can memorialize that it can legitimately be proud of, so there are plenty of good names to replace the current ones. Why is it that people like Forrest get put up as representatives of the South instead of Louis Armstrong or Elvis or any number of other people? Why does anyone allow this?

The confederacy was a shameful thing, but there being Southern and loving the South is not.
 
Displayed 50 of 589 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report