Virginia CountyTo Re-Name Schools After Confederates

[Kathryn]

That seems an odd regulation to oppose, given
the level of other regulations imposed. This one
is about safety. I know...having worked in Miami
in July. 140F in the building...95F outside where
I'd cool down. Shade & water enabled working.

And I bet they still get it.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

For their next trick, they plan to name other public facilities after....
The John Wayne Gacy Cafeteria
The Charles Manson Women's Health Clinic
The Ted Kaczynski Post Office
The Ted Bundy Youth Center
The Jim Jones Juice Bar
The Typhoid Mary Center For Disease Control.
The Donald Trump Sexual Assault Prevention Hot Line

Oo, let's have a go.

The Joseph Stalin foundation for political prisoners
The Chairman Mao agricultural commission
Joseph Mengele memorial medical clinic
Bonnie & Clyde's couples counciling

 

[Copernicus]

In God we trust is a response to the godless commies.

"In God We Trust" was made the official motto of our secular government in 1955. That slogan on coinage predated the American campaign against communism and socialism of the 20th century. It took place at the height of the Civil War, because it was seen as a morale booster of sorts back then by Christians that felt uncomfortable with the secular nature of the US government. But the motto was put on paper money in the 1950s during the height of the domestic anti-Communist witch hunt to symbolize our opposition to the Soviet Union's official promotion of "scientific atheism".

 

[fantome profane]

Now the fundies demand that every
hooker paid, every Twinkie bought,
& every Glock purchased be a prayer
to the Christian God.

Every dollar of hush money paid to help win an election.

 

[Stevicus]

In God we trust is a response to the godless commies.

 

[tytlyf]

They now deny that heritage.

Democrats deny their racist heritage? We're pointing out the racist heritage is the fault of conservatives. If the Democratic party never had a conservative past, then it wouldn't have the racist heritage.
Let's not pretend they were progressives/liberals

 

[Wandering Monk]

Democrats deny their racist heritage? We're pointing out the racist heritage is the fault of conservatives. If the Democratic party never had a conservative past, then it wouldn't have the racist heritage.
Let's not pretend they were progressives/liberals

Party platforms change. Attitudes are pretty static.

 

[Copernicus]

Democrats deny their racist heritage? We're pointing out the racist heritage is the fault of conservatives. If the Democratic party never had a conservative past, then it wouldn't have the racist heritage.
Let's not pretend they were progressives/liberals

The Democratic-Republican Party of Jefferson and Madison--pro-slavery politicians--ultimately evolved into today's Democratic Party. The Republican Party came together shortly before the Civil War as a magnet for Abolitionists and the moribund Whig Party. So the Democratic Party tended to be pro-slavery and largely dominated the South before the Civil War. After the emancipation of slaves, it was still largely a pro-segregation, pro-white supremacist party that ultimately backed the Jim Crow laws. In 1915, D.W. Griffith released the cinematic groundbreaker, Birth of a Nation* (originally The Klansman), that promoted a white supremacist version of the Civil War that extolled the Ku Klux Klan and vilified former slaves, black elected officials, and so-called "carpetbaggers" from the North. That film was the first film ever to be screened in the White House in 1916 by the southern Democratic President Woodrow Wilson. Until the passage for the 1964 Civil Rights Voting Act, Democrats tended to be a magnet for conservative segregationists, and the South was solidly Democratic. However, the Democratic Party had become dominated by progressives and were largely responsible for the passage of that bill. As predicted by southern Democratic President Lyndon Johnson at the time, the Democratic Party had "lost the South" with its passage. Republicans under Nixon quickly implemented their infamous Southern Strategy, which took advantage of white segregationist sentiment to flip the South to the Republican Party. So there has been something of a role reversal over time for the two major political parties regarding racial politics. It is now "woke" Democratic policy to remove statues, school names, and other symbols that honor the Confederate side of the Civil War.

*Available on Youtube

 

[tytlyf]

Party platforms change. Attitudes are pretty static.

Exactly. Southern Democrats were exclusively pro-confederacy, pro-slavery conservatives. Pro-KKK, pro-racism, etc.
Conservative media likes to gaslight their audience into believing these Democrats were progressives/liberals.
Which of course makes zero sense. At no point in history has the south been progressive or liberal.

 

[We Never Know]

The Donald Trump Truth Social social media platform.

Oh, wait a minute, that one actually exists!

The Trump sexual abuse hotline.

The problem would be knowing if it was to get help and support or report him

 

[Revoltingest]

The Democratic-Republican Party of Jefferson and Madison--pro-slavery politicians--ultimately evolved into today's Democratic Party. The Republican Party came together shortly before the Civil War as a magnet for Abolitionists and the moribund Whig Party. So the Democratic Party tended to be pro-slavery and largely dominated the South before the Civil War. After the emancipation of slaves, it was still largely a pro-segregation, pro-white supremacist party that ultimately backed the Jim Crow laws. In 1915, D.W. Griffith released the cinematic groundbreaker, Birth of a Nation* (originally The Klansman), that promoted a white supremacist version of the Civil War that extolled the Ku Klux Klan and vilified former slaves, black elected officials, and so-called "carpetbaggers" from the North. That film was the first film ever to be screened in the White House in 1916 by the southern Democratic President Woodrow Wilson. Until the passage for the 1964 Civil Rights Voting Act, Democrats tended to be a magnet for conservative segregationists, and the South was solidly Democratic. However, the Democratic Party had become dominated by progressives and were largely responsible for the passage of that bill. As predicted by southern Democratic President Lyndon Johnson at the time, the Democratic Party had "lost the South" with its passage. Republicans under Nixon quickly implemented their infamous Southern Strategy, which took advantage of white segregationist sentiment to flip the South to the Republican Party. So there has been something of a role reversal over time for the two major political parties regarding racial politics. It is now "woke" Democratic policy to remove statues, school names, and other symbols that honor the Confederate side of the Civil War.

*Available on Youtube

I question whether all slave owners among the founders
were pro slavery, & were perhaps slavery tolerant.
2 reasons....
1) Crafting a union would mean accommodating slave owners
to get them on board. I'm reminded of Lincoln, who played
a crafty game to achieve the best path that eliminated
slavery....which meant strategic but limited opposition.
But remember....he was favored by the Wide Awakes, who
were the prime moving group against it (IMO).
2) Owning slaves was falling out of favor. Not everyone moved
as quickly as others.

 

[Copernicus]

I question whether all slave owners among the founders
were pro slavery, & were perhaps slavery tolerant.
2 reasons....
1) Crafting a union would mean accommodating slave owners
to get them on board. I'm reminded of Lincoln, who played
a crafty game to achieve the best path that eliminated
slavery....which meant strategic but limited opposition.
But remember....he was favored by the Wide Awakes, who
were the prime moving group against it (IMO).
2) Owning slaves was falling out of favor. Not everyone moved
as quickly as others.

I think that there were a lot of slave owners who knew that slavery was morally wrong, and that included politicians like Washington, Jefferson, and Madison. However, they were politically pro-slavery, because they felt their personal fortunes were at risk. It's also true that a lot of anti-slavery politicians were white supremacists, which was true of Lincoln--at least, before the Civil War. It seems that Grant was far more opposed to slavery and white supremacy at a gut level than most others in that era. So the term "pro-slavery" is probably a misleading one.

I was thinking of the policy positions of politicians back then when I used the term. I took it to mean politicians who backed policies intended to keep slavery legal. In that sense, most of the so-called Founding Fathers were pro-slavery. Hamilton definitely was not, even though he may have had a spotty record on the subject in terms of his personal dealings. Chernow's biography (the basis for the Broadway musical) had him and Lafayette trying to convince Washington to free his slaves, but Washington never bought their argument that it wouldn't ruin him financially.

 

[Revoltingest]

I think that there were a lot of slave owners who knew that slavery was morally wrong, and that included politicians like Washington, Jefferson, and Madison. However, they were politically pro-slavery, because they felt their personal fortunes were at risk. It's also true that a lot of anti-slavery politicians were white supremacists, which was true of Lincoln--at least, before the Civil War. It seems that Grant was far more opposed to slavery and white supremacy at a gut level than most others in that era. So the term "pro-slavery" is probably a misleading one.

I was thinking of the policy positions of politicians back then when I used the term. I took it to mean politicians who backed policies intended to keep slavery legal. In that sense, most of the so-called Founding Fathers were pro-slavery. Hamilton definitely was not, even though he may have had a spotty record on the subject in terms of his personal dealings. Chernow's biography (the basis for the Broadway musical) had him and Lafayette trying to convince Washington to free his slaves, but Washington never bought their argument that it wouldn't ruin him financially.

From what I've read of Lincoln, his pre-war
views were more complex & evolving.

 

[Copernicus]

From what I've read of Lincoln, his pre-war
views were more complex & evolving.

That's true. By the end of his life, his attitudes had changed a lot, according to the biographical materials that I have read.

 

[Revoltingest]

That's true. By the end of his life, his attitudes had changed a lot, according to the biographical materials that I have read.

Even before the war, his views changed
based upon experience with slaves.