Charlottesville North?

Discussions
User avatar
Upton_O_Goode
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5102
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:15 am
Custom Title: Morgan de Veldt
Location: The Land Formerly Known as Pangea

Charlottesville North?

Post by Upton_O_Goode » Thu Mar 22, 2018 7:31 pm

This is all about Nazi and Confederate flags.

I've been asked to write some history of the University of Vermont, and that led me to a compendium put together for the bicentennial back in 1991, edited by my friend Bill Daniels (who died in 2010).

The article that caught my attention was by the writer Jules Older, whom you may know. He has published a lot. He was a 1962 graduate at the University and one of the pioneering Jewish students there. (Raul Hilberg had been hired in 1956, and he and Sam Bogorad in the English Department were, as far as I know, the first two Jewish professors.)

Anyway, Older's article bears the title, "Catholics, Blacks, and Jews." Older came to Vermont from a heavily Jewish portion of North Baltimore in 1958, hoping to broaden his experience of the world. That happened very quickly, as he was soon assaulted by one of Kappa Sigma's finest. Despite the assault, he wanted to pledge a fraternity, but didn't want to be ghettoized in a "Jewish fraternity." He went through Rush Week, and found that Kappa Sigma (the Animal House of its time, as he describes it) was sporting Nazi flags, only just over a decade after the War, and after the University had hired the man who was to become the founder of Holocaust Studies. He persevered, and married one of his fellow students. Before writing the article for the 1991 collection, he went back to Kappa Sigma and found that they are no longer the Animal House. (That honor, he said, had passed to Sigma Nu.) A considerable number of members of Kappa Sigma were in fact Jewish. So, progress of a sort. However, although all the Nazi flags were gone, there were still a couple of Confederate flags there. He suggested to the brothers that they might consider the effect those flags would have on African-American students; not very different from the effect the Nazi flags had on him.

Well, it's been a rocky road, and we still haven't arrived. When I first took up a position at UVM, the major social event of the winter was Kake Walk, a painful exhibition of white students dancing in blackface. It was abolished in 1970, to HOWLS of outrage from the alumni. (You can find YouTube videos of it. Yes, it is artistic, but it is inexcusably patronizing to African-Americans.)
“It is certainly sad and regrettable that so many innocent people died…Stalin was absolutely adamant on making doubly sure: spare no one…I don’t deny that I supported that view. I was simply not able to study every individual case…It was hard to draw a precise line where to stop.”

Vyacheslav Mikhailovich Skryabin (“Molotov”)

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 27725
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Thu Mar 22, 2018 7:51 pm

thanks, very interesting, you tie some "family history" together for me in fact
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has No Life
Posts: 12699
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am
Custom Title: Lost in Translation
Location: Safely stored in my own mind

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by Jeffk 1970 » Thu Mar 22, 2018 8:42 pm

Thanks, Upton, very interesting.
Question for Groening by a reporter:
“Mr. Groening, what do you say to those who still deny the Holocaust?”

Groening:
“Nothing. They are hopelessly lost.”


Harvard Crimson (on why it refused to run an add by Bradley Smith):
“(It is) vicious propaganda based on utter BS that has been discredited time and time again.”

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11738
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by landrew » Tue Mar 12, 2019 12:49 am

I vaguely remember the 60s and I seem to recall that nazi flags and memorabilia were fairly common, especially on bikers and the like, but there didn't seem to be much of the symbolism attributed to it as there is today. "A flag was a flag" for the most part, outside academia or the entertainment industry perhaps. The public in general was starting to think of nazis as becoming irrelevant and they were wanting to put the war behind them I seem to recall.

The confederate flag was already considered irrelevant by most people outside the south. There was a bit of opposition to it by the civil rights movement, but it seemed to be overshadowed by immense southern pride, which largely went unchallenged in those times. Southern pride seemed to re-empower itself in later decades by uncoupling it from slavery it seems.

Was it a more sensible attitude in the 60s? Are we overly sensitive and confrontational regarding these flags? Are we better off putting history behind us without applying retroactive politically-correct judgment?
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19760
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Mar 12, 2019 12:59 am

Our forefathers were a bunch of racists {!#%@}. Its pretty much the hooman condition. To be recognized and ............. decided.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11738
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by landrew » Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:11 am

I predict a long, slow death for confederate pride.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

Balmoral95
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3246
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:14 am
Location: The Free Nambia Healthcare Nirvana

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by Balmoral95 » Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:32 am

landrew wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:11 am
I predict a long, slow death for confederate pride.
If you haven't read a book called "Confederates in the Attic".... Dated now, but explains a lot....

https://www.amazon.com/Confederates-Att ... 067975833X

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11738
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by landrew » Tue Mar 12, 2019 3:59 pm

I don't pretend to understand the southern point of view of the confederacy, but it's obvious that their fondness for the antebellum or "old south" is based on selective memory. It was no doubt a wonderfully affluent lifestyle, but it was also based on a slave economy, where captive human beings were used as work animals, and often treated inhumanely. I'm sure that life with slaves in the Roman Empire was similarly pleasant. Revisionists have tried to portray the slaves as enjoying their position in life and loving their masters, but even if partially true, it's no way relevant to the fact that slavery is a gross violation of human rights. Those who selectively forget that fact, and choose to remember only the pleasant aspects of that shameful period of history, are doing a great dis-service to African Americans.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19760
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Mar 12, 2019 4:05 pm

landrew wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 3:59 pm
Those who selectively forget that fact, and choose to remember only the pleasant aspects of that shameful period of history, are doing a great dis-service to African Americans.
LMFTFY: ......are doing a great dis-service to African Americans, the truth and common sense, and those enslaved throughout history. ///// I could add a few more, but you get the drift.

What always gets me is that the great majority of whites lived in poverty as well yet supported the notion of other whites getting rich and out competing their own efforts by holding slaves. Thats bad enough..........but then they fought to the death to maintain the wealth disparity.

I tells ya: hoomans are stoopid.

.......................................................... Just look.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11738
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by landrew » Tue Mar 12, 2019 4:15 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 4:05 pm
landrew wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 3:59 pm
Those who selectively forget that fact, and choose to remember only the pleasant aspects of that shameful period of history, are doing a great dis-service to African Americans.
LMFTFY: ......are doing a great dis-service to African Americans, the truth and common sense, and those enslaved throughout history. ///// I could add a few more, but you get the drift.

What always gets me is that the great majority of whites lived in poverty as well yet supported the notion of other whites getting rich and out competing their own efforts by holding slaves. Thats bad enough..........but then they fought to the death to maintain the wealth disparity.

I tells ya: hoomans are stoopid.

.......................................................... Just look.
It's not very relevant that there were a lot of poor whites in the old south, There were poor whites everywhere. The "old glory" portrayed in books and film referred to the lifestyles of the wealthy.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19760
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Mar 12, 2019 4:21 pm

Yes........thats the issue. Not very relevant that poor whites died so that rich whites could own slaves huh? Is that your best thinking?
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11738
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by landrew » Tue Mar 12, 2019 4:30 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 4:21 pm
Yes........thats the issue. Not very relevant that poor whites died so that rich whites could own slaves huh? Is that your best thinking?
It's relevant that the rich whites didn't hesitate to send the poor whites to fight the North, to prevent them from liberating their slaves and bringing their hegemony to an end. It's hard to understand the thinking of the poor whites in the south, who fought so hard and suffered so much for the monsters who ran the south. Even harder to believe that so much of that stubborn pride remains nearly a century and a half later.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19760
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Mar 12, 2019 4:38 pm

Gee landrew.....that sounds like a relevant issue if one is a poor white.

You have now claimed both sides of the arguement.

Do you have a tie breaker?
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11738
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by landrew » Tue Mar 12, 2019 4:48 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 4:38 pm
Gee landrew.....that sounds like a relevant issue if one is a poor white.

You have now claimed both sides of the arguement.

Do you have a tie breaker?
Troll on sweet prince.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19760
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Mar 12, 2019 4:54 pm

landrew: you have made inconsistent even contradictory statements. Call me a troll as you wish: or decide which of your positions is really your best thinking. I've told you mine which is entirely consistent.

Hard to be taken to task by a troll. yet, that is your status.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11738
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by landrew » Tue Mar 12, 2019 5:22 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 4:54 pm
landrew: you have made inconsistent even contradictory statements. Call me a troll as you wish: or decide which of your positions is really your best thinking. I've told you mine which is entirely consistent.

Hard to be taken to task by a troll. yet, that is your status.
Well, it's mine that are entirely consistent. I made no claims, only observations, some of which seem contradictory, but I see where you got confused.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19760
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Mar 12, 2019 5:40 pm

So.........unconfuse me. What is sensible about poor whites fighting and dying so that rich whites could hold slaves?
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11738
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by landrew » Tue Mar 12, 2019 5:50 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 5:40 pm
So.........unconfuse me. What is sensible about poor whites fighting and dying so that rich whites could hold slaves?
I'm no student of the old south or the confederacy, but if I'd venture a guess, I'd say that the south had mounted a great deal of anti-north propaganda before the war. It seems to have been very effective, because much of that animosity persists to this day. I doubt that the average confederate soldier was motivated to fight to protect the rich plantation owners from losing their slaves, but the perception that the "damnable yankees" were coming to destroy everything they hold dear, or something to that effect. Again, I'm no authority on the subject. I just ask questions or speculate about things I don't know.

I admit, I'm fascinated and mystified by the phenomenon of confederate pride, even though it's probably self-evident to most white southerners. I started engaging this topic to learn, not to make claims. I admit my ignorance, so enlighten me if you can.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
OlegTheBatty
Has No Life
Posts: 12019
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:35 pm
Custom Title: Uppity Atheist

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by OlegTheBatty » Tue Mar 12, 2019 6:00 pm

landrew wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 12:49 am
I vaguely remember the 60s and I seem to recall that nazi flags and memorabilia were fairly common, especially on bikers and the like, but there didn't seem to be much of the symbolism attributed to it as there is today. "A flag was a flag" for the most part, outside academia or the entertainment industry perhaps. The public in general was starting to think of nazis as becoming irrelevant and they were wanting to put the war behind them I seem to recall.

The confederate flag was already considered irrelevant by most people outside the south. There was a bit of opposition to it by the civil rights movement, but it seemed to be overshadowed by immense southern pride, which largely went unchallenged in those times. Southern pride seemed to re-empower itself in later decades by uncoupling it from slavery it seems.

Was it a more sensible attitude in the 60s? Are we overly sensitive and confrontational regarding these flags? Are we better off putting history behind us without applying retroactive politically-correct judgment?
Late 60's, early 70's, the Nazi and Confederate flags represented anti-establishment attitudes. As the anti-establishmentists got real jobs and drifted toward the mainstream, the racist connotations became more evident, and the flags largely disappeared.
. . . with the satisfied air of a man who thinks he has an idea of his own because he has commented on the idea of another . . . - Alexandre Dumas 'The Count of Monte Cristo"

There is no statement so absurd that it has not been uttered by some philosopher. - Cicero

.......................Doesn't matter how often I'm proved wrong.................... ~ bobbo the pragmatist

User avatar
OlegTheBatty
Has No Life
Posts: 12019
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:35 pm
Custom Title: Uppity Atheist

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by OlegTheBatty » Tue Mar 12, 2019 6:03 pm

landrew wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 5:50 pm
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 5:40 pm
So.........unconfuse me. What is sensible about poor whites fighting and dying so that rich whites could hold slaves?
I'm no student of the old south or the confederacy, but if I'd venture a guess, I'd say that the south had mounted a great deal of anti-north propaganda before the war. It seems to have been very effective, because much of that animosity persists to this day. I doubt that the average confederate soldier was motivated to fight to protect the rich plantation owners from losing their slaves, but the perception that the "damnable yankees" were coming to destroy everything they hold dear, or something to that effect. Again, I'm no authority on the subject. I just ask questions or speculate about things I don't know.

I admit, I'm fascinated and mystified by the phenomenon of confederate pride, even though it's probably self-evident to most white southerners. I started engaging this topic to learn, not to make claims. I admit my ignorance, so enlighten me if you can.
Poor Republicans still support the wealthy plundering them. In Feudal times, serfs fought for their lords. There is really nothing new here.
. . . with the satisfied air of a man who thinks he has an idea of his own because he has commented on the idea of another . . . - Alexandre Dumas 'The Count of Monte Cristo"

There is no statement so absurd that it has not been uttered by some philosopher. - Cicero

.......................Doesn't matter how often I'm proved wrong.................... ~ bobbo the pragmatist

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11738
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by landrew » Tue Mar 12, 2019 6:08 pm

OlegTheBatty wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 6:03 pm
landrew wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 5:50 pm
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 5:40 pm
So.........unconfuse me. What is sensible about poor whites fighting and dying so that rich whites could hold slaves?
I'm no student of the old south or the confederacy, but if I'd venture a guess, I'd say that the south had mounted a great deal of anti-north propaganda before the war. It seems to have been very effective, because much of that animosity persists to this day. I doubt that the average confederate soldier was motivated to fight to protect the rich plantation owners from losing their slaves, but the perception that the "damnable yankees" were coming to destroy everything they hold dear, or something to that effect. Again, I'm no authority on the subject. I just ask questions or speculate about things I don't know.

I admit, I'm fascinated and mystified by the phenomenon of confederate pride, even though it's probably self-evident to most white southerners. I started engaging this topic to learn, not to make claims. I admit my ignorance, so enlighten me if you can.
Poor Republicans still support the wealthy plundering them. In Feudal times, serfs fought for their lords. There is really nothing new here.
Yes, resembles the Stockholm syndrome, doesn't it?
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 27725
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Tue Mar 12, 2019 6:09 pm

landrew wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 4:30 pm
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 4:21 pm
Yes........thats the issue. Not very relevant that poor whites died so that rich whites could own slaves huh? Is that your best thinking?
It's relevant that the rich whites didn't hesitate to send the poor whites to fight the North, to prevent them from liberating their slaves and bringing their hegemony to an end. It's hard to understand the thinking of the poor whites in the south, who fought so hard and suffered so much for the monsters who ran the south. Even harder to believe that so much of that stubborn pride remains nearly a century and a half later.
1. one has to consider, I think, what nearly all southern whites derived from participation in the benefits of white supremacy bestowed on them in a society structured by slavery and the oppression/exploitation of African Americans - the system generated a feeling of white superiority and solidarity, which because of the geography of slavery created a regional worldview - non-plantation-owning whites supported the system, as many people in many settings support systems they don't rule in and shared in the white supremacy and regional solidarity
2. it is a mistake IMO to think of the American South before the civil war mainly in terms of the plantation system; about 1/4 of whites held at least one slave - my recollection is that the data aren't clear but that as many as half of those slave holders lived on what we would call small farms, not plantations and held 1 to maybe 20 slaves - OTOH most slaves, by far, lived on plantations with at least 10s of other slaves whilst only a minority of slaves lives on the small farms - also many slaves were hired out to work in non-farming establishments and labor in railroad building - this had implications for those held in bondage as well as for whites in the South and for the southern system as a whole
3. efforts to place limits on the slave system along with growing abolitionist sentiment in northern states intensified southern white solidarity and gave it a paranoid, aggressive, victimized edge
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
OlegTheBatty
Has No Life
Posts: 12019
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:35 pm
Custom Title: Uppity Atheist

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by OlegTheBatty » Tue Mar 12, 2019 6:16 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 6:09 pm
landrew wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 4:30 pm
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 4:21 pm
Yes........thats the issue. Not very relevant that poor whites died so that rich whites could own slaves huh? Is that your best thinking?
It's relevant that the rich whites didn't hesitate to send the poor whites to fight the North, to prevent them from liberating their slaves and bringing their hegemony to an end. It's hard to understand the thinking of the poor whites in the south, who fought so hard and suffered so much for the monsters who ran the south. Even harder to believe that so much of that stubborn pride remains nearly a century and a half later.
1. one has to consider, I think, what nearly all southern whites derived from participation in the benefits of white supremacy bestowed on them in a society structured by slavery and the oppression/exploitation of African Americans - the system generated a feeling of white superiority and solidarity, which because of the geography of slavery created a regional worldview - non-plantation-owning whites supported the system, as many people in many settings support systems they don't rule in and shared in the white supremacy and regional solidarity
2. it is a mistake IMO to think of the American South before the civil war mainly in terms of the plantation system; about 1/4 of whites held at least one slave - my recollection is that the data aren't clear but that as many as half of those slave holders lived on what we would call small farms, not plantations and held 1 to maybe 20 slaves - OTOH most slaves, by far, lived on plantations with at least 10s of other slaves whilst only a minority of slaves lives on the small farms - also many slaves were hired out to work in non-farming establishments and labor in railroad building - this had implications for those held in bondage as well as for whites in the South and for the southern system as a whole
3. efforts to place limits on the slave system along with growing abolitionist sentiment in northern states intensified southern white solidarity and gave it a paranoid, aggressive, victimized edge
Good points.

It is not necessary for the 'lower classes' to benefit from the current arrangement, only that enough of them perceive that they do. When people have only one social experience, that is what feels most normal. Intellectual awareness of other arrangements doesn't change that.
. . . with the satisfied air of a man who thinks he has an idea of his own because he has commented on the idea of another . . . - Alexandre Dumas 'The Count of Monte Cristo"

There is no statement so absurd that it has not been uttered by some philosopher. - Cicero

.......................Doesn't matter how often I'm proved wrong.................... ~ bobbo the pragmatist

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19760
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Mar 13, 2019 5:11 am

I agree Stat Mech does make good points. and I can even see and agree with some sort of fuzzy general perception of the status quo being to my benefit but when it comes to leaving my family and farm to go off and fight for something, the justification for THAT ACTION has to be clear and overwhelming "in my mind."

So, its must have been as true then as it is now: Southern White men are just stupid. Its why are into High School sports for Gods sake. I mean: High School: not even college.

Heh, heh. At least that does make sense. Stupid does as stupid do.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 27725
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:24 pm

>> I admit, I'm fascinated and mystified by the phenomenon of confederate pride

this recent WaPo profile is relevant: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mag ... 7e254fb1c5
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19760
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:26 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:24 pm
>> I admit, I'm fascinated and mystified by the phenomenon of confederate pride

this recent WaPo profile is relevant: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mag ... 7e254fb1c5
Nope...........till not going to pay to read some article........even as on point as it looked in the .25 second flash of it I got.

Care to summarize any key points for those who won't pay?
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11738
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by landrew » Wed Mar 13, 2019 3:46 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:26 pm
Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:24 pm
>> I admit, I'm fascinated and mystified by the phenomenon of confederate pride

this recent WaPo profile is relevant: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mag ... 7e254fb1c5
Nope...........till not going to pay to read some article........even as on point as it looked in the .25 second flash of it I got.

Care to summarize any key points for those who won't pay?
Here's a "Reader's Digest" version (of a Reader's Digest version) that you can read that sums up the article in short: https://www.resetera.com/threads/wapo-s ... ise.85124/

Personally, it looks like denialism and revisionism. The central figure claims that the civil war wasn't about slavery, it was all about aggressive exploitation of the south by the north, and goes on to assert that African Americans were treated humanely enough through the years, they were happy under slavery and how terribly the victorious north treated the south after the war...

But who's keeping score? No war has ever been perfectly fair and equitable. Both sides played dirty, but compared to other conflicts, it wasn't so bad. I'm sure there's much much more to learn, and I haven't even scratched the surface.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19760
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Mar 13, 2019 3:49 pm

landrew wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 3:46 pm

Personally, it looks like denialism and revisionism.
Thanks for finding and posting and the excellent concise review. Ha, ha...."wage slave" does come to mind: Raise your hand: how many of you are happy?
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11738
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by landrew » Wed Mar 13, 2019 4:13 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 3:49 pm
landrew wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 3:46 pm

Personally, it looks like denialism and revisionism.
Thanks for finding and posting and the excellent concise review. Ha, ha...."wage slave" does come to mind: Raise your hand: how many of you are happy?
The parallels between the confederacy and naziism are becoming more numerous with each passing year. Just as holocaust denial is being wrested to the ground, denial of institutional racism in the south is rearing it's ugly head.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11738
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by landrew » Wed Mar 13, 2019 4:49 pm

...but then again, we could just be a bunch of yella-bellied, Hillary-lovin' northern liberals.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11738
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by landrew » Sat Mar 16, 2019 4:08 pm

I can't find it now, but I watched a documentary a few weeks ago about a violent conflict that broke out in Texas after the civil war, where dozens were killed, apparently sparked by lingering hatred between north and south. The narrator said a smoldering conflict blew up into a violent conflict because some African American soldiers were sent in to try to keep the peace. This was purported to be the "cause" of the conflict. It seems to me that the actual "cause" was stubborn southern pride based on blatant racism.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Balsamo
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2099
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by Balsamo » Sat Mar 16, 2019 4:52 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 6:09 pm
landrew wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 4:30 pm
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 4:21 pm
Yes........thats the issue. Not very relevant that poor whites died so that rich whites could own slaves huh? Is that your best thinking?
It's relevant that the rich whites didn't hesitate to send the poor whites to fight the North, to prevent them from liberating their slaves and bringing their hegemony to an end. It's hard to understand the thinking of the poor whites in the south, who fought so hard and suffered so much for the monsters who ran the south. Even harder to believe that so much of that stubborn pride remains nearly a century and a half later.
1. one has to consider, I think, what nearly all southern whites derived from participation in the benefits of white supremacy bestowed on them in a society structured by slavery and the oppression/exploitation of African Americans - the system generated a feeling of white superiority and solidarity, which because of the geography of slavery created a regional worldview - non-plantation-owning whites supported the system, as many people in many settings support systems they don't rule in and shared in the white supremacy and regional solidarity
2. it is a mistake IMO to think of the American South before the civil war mainly in terms of the plantation system; about 1/4 of whites held at least one slave - my recollection is that the data aren't clear but that as many as half of those slave holders lived on what we would call small farms, not plantations and held 1 to maybe 20 slaves - OTOH most slaves, by far, lived on plantations with at least 10s of other slaves whilst only a minority of slaves lives on the small farms - also many slaves were hired out to work in non-farming establishments and labor in railroad building - this had implications for those held in bondage as well as for whites in the South and for the southern system as a whole
3. efforts to place limits on the slave system along with growing abolitionist sentiment in northern states intensified southern white solidarity and gave it a paranoid, aggressive, victimized edge
Hi Stat.
Are you sure about your numbers? That is that around 25% of the population were slave owners? That seems pretty much too me.

But i agree with you that the economical aspect have been exaggerated. Of course, the economy heavily relied on the slave system, and the abolition was perceived as disruptive.
But i think the Southern fear - at least in some state -went beyond that and were more existentialist.
I have no number here, but i do remember that some southern States - Alabama ? - had a huge proportion of Slave population. And a bit like in South Africa, and emancipation of the colored population could have been seen as a fundamental threat to the "Southern way of life".

One of the main reasons for the adoption of the policy of Apartheid in South Africa was precisely the growing demographic threat. It is hard to believe, but if i remember correctly, of course, the proportion of black and whites in South Africa was much closer to parity, but the constant immigration as well as the huge difference in birth rate changed the balance.

Ok, just checked on Google:
Slaves represented 55% of the population in Mississippi, 57% in South Carolina, and 45% in Alabama. I can clearly understand why the perspective to have this population freed raised fear in those very conservative white society. Seems a good reason to go to war and to fight to the bitter end to prevent that perspective.

I am pretty sure that the proportion of black population was much lower within the Union States.

Demographic fear is one of the main factors behind the rise of nationalism in Europe today. It is one of the main reason why the Right and the far right are so popular in Israel.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 27725
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Sat Mar 16, 2019 5:03 pm

Balsamo wrote:
Sat Mar 16, 2019 4:52 pm
Are you sure about your numbers? That is that around 25% of the population were slave owners? That seems pretty much too me.
That was from recollection. I actually checked after posting and didn't see any need to edit my post.

This site for instance gives a higher % than what I remembered: https://www.history.com/news/5-myths-about-slavery; this one gives the 1/4 estimate: http://theconversation.com/american-sla ... myth-79620

My larger point was that the image of slavery as confined to large plantations is distorted and a view of the slaveholding system as affecting only the economically most successful planters misses a lot of what was going on in the South.

I certainly don't disagree with your point that demographic fear was a factor - I think your point is a good one; from my reading about the slaveholdrs (admittedly done decades ago) what came through strongest however was their defense of a system and way of life, along with a critique of capitalism. They had intense fear of the North and a deep sense of victimization and grievance about the North. And also for sure fear of rebellions and black revenge and the like - although I recollect fire-eaters often imbedding such fears in their views about the North's machinations. There was a mix of factors, fear and "positive values," that led to the "fire-eating" stance of the South.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11738
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by landrew » Sat Mar 16, 2019 7:53 pm

I don't see the relevance of establishing the actual percentage of white slave owners. All people with the legal status of "slave," were owned by someone. Those who had the legal status of "free negro" in the south varied from 1% to 13% in the years between the revolutionary war and the civil war. The 1860 United States Census counted nearly 4 million slaves against a total population of 31.4 million, which constituted about 12.6% of the total population.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19760
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Mar 16, 2019 8:10 pm

You don't get what demographic fear is based on huh? Even after you read it.................how many times?
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 27725
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Sat Mar 16, 2019 8:32 pm

landrew wrote:
Sat Mar 16, 2019 7:53 pm
I don't see the relevance of establishing the actual percentage of white slave owners.
It helps you understand the relationship of various groups of white people in the South to slavery and to the slave system. And the variety of contexts in which blacks held in bondage found themselves.
landrew wrote:
Sat Mar 16, 2019 7:53 pm
All people with the legal status of "slave," were owned by someone.
Some enslaved blacks were held on small farms and lived and worked with very few others in bondage, rarely seeing or talking to their peers; some were hired out to differing businesses; some were enslaved on large plantations with large workforces and a variety of roles. If you want to understand the system, how it affected people, and how different groups related to it, you have to understand the baseline facts including this kind of data.

To Balsamo's point, the owner of a small farm with one slave whose property was located in an area with other smaller farms with few slaves each could well have a different perspective to that of a large plantation owner holding 200 or more slaves and set in the heart of plantation country. These differing outlooks, fears, and preferences would stem in part from the differing social situations of the various cases.

The data show, first, that the number of whites holding slaves was not minuscule and that slave-owners were not only those in a tiny pseudo-aristocracy but rather that there was a degree of dispersion of slave ownership giving somewhat broad stake in the system among whites, contrary to some of your earlier speculation, and, second, that the labor process and social relations differed from large plantations to small farmsteads, with important implications for both enslaved blacks and whites in the region.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
Jeff_36
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5233
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm
Location: At the hundredth meridian, where the great plains begin

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by Jeff_36 » Sat Mar 16, 2019 8:45 pm

Balmoral95 wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:32 am
landrew wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:11 am
I predict a long, slow death for confederate pride.
If you haven't read a book called "Confederates in the Attic".... Dated now, but explains a lot....

https://www.amazon.com/Confederates-Att ... 067975833X
Having read the book some time ago I could not agree more. It stuns me to realize that there are people out there who haven't gotten over Appomattox.

User avatar
Balsamo
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2099
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by Balsamo » Sat Mar 16, 2019 8:47 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Sat Mar 16, 2019 5:03 pm
Balsamo wrote:
Sat Mar 16, 2019 4:52 pm
Are you sure about your numbers? That is that around 25% of the population were slave owners? That seems pretty much too me.
That was from recollection. I actually checked after posting and didn't see any need to edit my post.

This site for instance gives a higher % than what I remembered: https://www.history.com/news/5-myths-about-slavery; this one gives the 1/4 estimate: http://theconversation.com/american-sla ... myth-79620

My larger point was that the image of slavery as confined to large plantations is distorted and a view of the slaveholding system as affecting only the economically most successful planters misses a lot of what was going on in the South.

I certainly don't disagree with your point that demographic fear was a factor - I think your point is a good one; from my reading about the slaveholdrs (admittedly done decades ago) what came through strongest however was their defense of a system and way of life, along with a critique of capitalism. They had intense fear of the North and a deep sense of victimization and grievance about the North. And also for sure fear of rebellions and black revenge and the like - although I recollect fire-eaters often imbedding such fears in their views about the North's machinations. There was a mix of factors, fear and "positive values," that led to the "fire-eating" stance of the South.
Thanks for the links - well especially the second one - as i am not very fond of History channel.
The confusion might be between "household" and "population".
It seems that there were around 393.000 slave owners in the South...which indeed represents 4% of the population, but apparently more like 20-25% of the households. I am still quite surprised, i admit, because of the cost of a Slave. I had some numbers from XVIII century planters in Saint Domingue, which are quite irrelevant in the circumstances, but the fact that it was pretty expensive, not only the buying price, but the maintenance (gosh that sounds awful!!).
So yes i am surprised that 25% of the household could afford a Slave.
Thanks for your infos.


Landrew
don't see the relevance of establishing the actual percentage of white slave owners. All people with the legal status of "slave," were owned by someone. Those who had the legal status of "free negro" in the south varied from 1% to 13% in the years between the revolutionary war and the civil war. The 1860 United States Census counted nearly 4 million slaves against a total population of 31.4 million, which constituted about 12.6% of the total population.
The relevance?
It indicates how many people were actually affected/concerned by the suppression of Slavery, at that time quite an expensive "asset" ( :? i hate writing such things).

Thanks for your numbers. It confirms that only the Southern States were having slaves concentrated in their States. There the ratio was more like 60 white-40% black, with the exception of the States i mentioned above.
Indeed the fear of revenge must have been great in some states, as Statmec pointed out, after 2 and a half century of white domination, and of seeing these population granted "equal" rights and political power.
Ok it did not really happened that way - as slavery was replaced by discrimination, but still.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5233
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm
Location: At the hundredth meridian, where the great plains begin

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by Jeff_36 » Sat Mar 16, 2019 8:50 pm

Speaking of population sattistics: Several counties in the Mississippi Delta region boasted slave populations of 90% or higher in 1850. This according to Why Nations Fail - a 2012 tract on development economics that I've read a few times.

What is more - slavery ended in 1865, but several states imposed vagrency laws that allowed the pre-bellum planter elite to tap into a source of cheap labour. This continued until the 1920's.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19760
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Charlottesville North?

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Mar 16, 2019 8:52 pm

Jeff_36 wrote:
Sat Mar 16, 2019 8:50 pm

What is more - slavery ended in 1865, but several states imposed vagrency laws that allowed the pre-bellum planter elite to tap into a source of cheap labour. This continued until the 1920's.
Its going on right now..............for profit prisons, fire fighters, redemption centers, even chain gangs seeing a recurrence. Black and/or poor.....it will MAGA!!!!
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?