IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 21st January 2021, 06:11 PM   #81
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 29,361
It looks like the type of thing that would be written in North Korea.
__________________
"The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before."

"Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)
angrysoba is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st January 2021, 06:27 PM   #82
ChrisBFRPKY
Illuminator
 
ChrisBFRPKY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,662
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
To pwengthold's point, I don't know what is really taught to real fifth graders in America. The news media stories pick and choose little bits of things here and there.

When I was in high school in the 1970s, I think there was a pretty good balance and realistic treatment of history. The Constitution was praised, but the Founding Fathers weren't portrayed as perfect, and the obvious contradiction of the ideals of the rhetoric of the Declaration of Independence and principles of the Constitution were pointed out, as they should be.
That's the thing. The Constitution describes the founding fathers vision of what a perfect Government should be. They knew that vision would not come to pass overnight. As Americans it's our standard by which to judge how we're doing as a society and duty to strive to live by those words for the good of all Americans.
ChrisBFRPKY is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st January 2021, 06:41 PM   #83
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 6,392
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
Portugal.
Okay, that's one. Much like Vermont was just one (sovereign nation at the time) which abolished slavery before 1789. (Unlike the Portuguese, though, Vermonters did not continue enthusiastic overseas slave trading for some generations thereafter.) How does this datum support your contention that the U.S. was behind Europe at the time of the founding?

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
I can't find anything saying slavery was legal in Denmark after the middle ages.
If the "Danish ban on the transatlantic slave trade in 1792 marked the beginning of the end of slavery" then the beginning wasn't sometime earlier. (Link)
__________________
"Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin

Last edited by d4m10n; 21st January 2021 at 06:59 PM.
d4m10n is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st January 2021, 06:44 PM   #84
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 20,228
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
Okay, that's one. Much like Vermont was just one (sovereign nation at the time) which abolished slavery before 1789.

How does this support your contention that the U.S. was behind Europe at the time of the founding?
You said, "anywhere in Europe." I answered that. If you wanted more, you should have stated so. I have hit the limit of requests from you I will fulfill.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st January 2021, 07:00 PM   #85
Norman Alexander
Philosopher
 
Norman Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Gundungurra
Posts: 8,773
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
This report is bollocks, its part of the right's crusade against the truth about America's racist past. It is almost certainly the brainchild Trump's racist advisor, Stephen Miller (one wag on Twitter accurately referred to is as "Stephen Miller's seventh-grade term paper"). Its an attempt at history revisionism by trying to refute teachings on systemic racism, critical race theory, and deeper examinations of how slavery has affected American society, particularly trying to whitewash slavery (no pun intended).

The biggest insult is that it was released on Martin Luther King Jr. Day - this was no co-incidence - the timing that turns my stomach!

ETA: https://www.esquire.com/news-politic...rican-history/
This. Being somewhat aware of Miller's history at university and the bollocks he trotted out then, it chimes pretty well with his ideas. IOW, it's eugenics bull-****.
__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornets’ nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015
Norman Alexander is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st January 2021, 07:01 PM   #86
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 6,392
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
Because europe was well ahead on banning slavery in their own countries.
If by Europe, you mean Portugal (strictly within its own national borders) then yes.

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
I have hit the limit of requests from you I will fulfill.
I don't really expect you to come up with evidence, Bob.
__________________
"Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin

Last edited by d4m10n; 21st January 2021 at 07:03 PM.
d4m10n is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st January 2021, 07:06 PM   #87
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 20,228
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post

If the "Danish ban on the transatlantic slave trade in 1792 marked the beginning of the end of slavery" then the beginning wasn't sometime earlier. (Link)
That article talks about slaves in the western hemisphere.

I can't locate any slaves in Denmark. Everything I find is exclusively talking about slavery in the Americas perpetrated by Denmark.

Last edited by Agatha; 22nd January 2021 at 01:46 PM.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st January 2021, 07:49 PM   #88
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 25,226
Originally Posted by crescent View Post
And, the AHA misses the point.

There are things in their statement that are correct, but there are many others that are not exactly wrong, because they make no real, concrete, testable assertion, but are misleading.


And, just one pet peeve, because it is something that I have heard stated many times in recent weeks as we talk about last year in review, and unlike most of the AHA statement, makes an actual, testable, claim.

Quote:
including the “defamation of our treasured national statues.” The vast majority of targeted statues, as the AHA has noted before, honor either men who committed treason by violating oaths of office and taking up arms against the United States government, or whose main historical significance lay in their defense of slavery or other forms of white supremacy.
I've heard it a lot lately. It's false. The majority of statues toppled in the waves of crowd violence this summer were not associated with the Confederacy.

This may seem like some sort of quibble, but I just think that a group of scholars preparing a denunciation ought to fact check their claims.
__________________
Yes, yes. I know you're right, but would it hurt you to actually provide some information?

Last edited by Meadmaker; 21st January 2021 at 08:10 PM.
Meadmaker is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st January 2021, 07:53 PM   #89
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 28,243
Originally Posted by ChrisBFRPKY View Post
That's the thing. The Constitution describes the founding fathers vision of what a perfect Government should be. They knew that vision would not come to pass overnight. As Americans it's our standard by which to judge how we're doing as a society and duty to strive to live by those words for the good of all Americans.
I'm always bumfuzzled about the Constitution.

It was in many ways a great document. But in many ways it wasn't. It pronounced freedom and liberty for all, yet it really only guaranteed rights to white male landowners over the age of 21. It locked into it an almost permanent system that favored farmers over everyone else.

It was great as an aspirational cornerstone, but flawed in how it ensures those aspirations.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st January 2021, 08:09 PM   #90
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 25,226
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
I'm always bumfuzzled about the Constitution.

It was in many ways a great document. But in many ways it wasn't. It pronounced freedom and liberty for all, yet it really only guaranteed rights to white male landowners over the age of 21. It locked into it an almost permanent system that favored farmers over everyone else.

It was great as an aspirational cornerstone, but flawed in how it ensures those aspirations.
I think its greatest triumph was that it created a government whose foundational aspect was the separation of powers. That's important. It allowed for judicial review and an actual mechanism for overturning the tyranny of the majority.

It wasn't perfect, by any means. I think some sections are in need of a major overhaul, or at least some clarifications, but they did good with it.
__________________
Yes, yes. I know you're right, but would it hurt you to actually provide some information?
Meadmaker is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st January 2021, 08:20 PM   #91
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 6,392
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
Everything I find is exclusively talking about slavery in the Americas perpetrated by Denmark.
Which nation would you say was responsible for Danish slave trading across the Atlantic?
__________________
"Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin
d4m10n is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st January 2021, 08:26 PM   #92
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 59,464
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
Which nation would you say was responsible for Danish slave trading across the Atlantic?
Atlantis, obviously.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st January 2021, 08:36 PM   #93
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 50,334
Originally Posted by crescent View Post
As suspected, it was total crap.
The omission of the Civil War tells all you need to know about that a piece of garbage this is.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st January 2021, 08:38 PM   #94
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 50,334
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
Which nation would you say was responsible for Danish slave trading across the Atlantic?
The Danes were pretty good at slave raiding in their VIking Days, but the slaves were not White, and I htink it had sort of petered out by the time the Atlantic Trade started....
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st January 2021, 08:46 PM   #95
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 20,228
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
Which nation would you say was responsible for Danish slave trading across the Atlantic?
Which is why I distinguished inside europe.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st January 2021, 11:37 PM   #96
DevilsAdvocate
Philosopher
 
DevilsAdvocate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,448
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Seriously, who was the intended audience for this tripe? And what's with 'Commision'? My kids could crank out more (and not been douche canoes about it) during commercial breaks one evening watching tv. Was someone actually paid real money to produce this? How much? I could train a poodle to cut and paste better. And who FFS was supposed to read it and in what context?
The purpose is laid out in the Executive Order that established the Commission. You can read that here: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/...-202000834.htm

The report was to establish a version of history that would be the official version of the Federal government. That would have had far reaching affects.

That report would control the information provided to the public at national parks, monuments, museums, installations, etc. It would control information used for Independence Day celebrations, especially the upcoming 250th anniversary.

It would establish a "Presidential 1776 Award" to recognize student knowledge of the American founding. That would probably mean something like distributing this report to school with a test where it is taught in every school with student's passing the test getting an award.

It would be the basis of information taught during Constitution Day, which would be required by every school that receives Federal funding. It would be used to facilitate, advise upon, and promote other activities to spread this information.

It would be the basis for information under the Program on Enhanced Civics Education. It would be the basis for for the American History and Civics Academies that provide workshops and training to school teachers.

It would prioritize being consistent with this report in available Federal resources and grants from the Department of Education, Department of Defense, and Department of State.

The intention of the report was to be the basis of a widespread information program through many means.
__________________
I don't need to fight to prove I'm right. - Baba O'Riley
DevilsAdvocate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2021, 05:35 AM   #97
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 6,392
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
Which is why I distinguished inside europe.
Why are you giving the seafaring colonial powers a free pass on the transatlantic slave trade?

Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
The Danes were pretty good at slave raiding in their VIking Days, but the slaves were not White, and I htink it had sort of petered out by the time the Atlantic Trade started....
Not so. (Link)
__________________
"Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin

Last edited by d4m10n; 22nd January 2021 at 05:36 AM.
d4m10n is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2021, 05:40 AM   #98
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 96,954
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
...snip...


I've heard it a lot lately. It's false. The majority of statues toppled in the waves of crowd violence this summer were not associated with the Confederacy.

This may seem like some sort of quibble, but I just think that a group of scholars preparing a denunciation ought to fact check their claims.
Evidence?
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2021, 06:20 AM   #99
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 25,226
Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate View Post
The purpose is laid out in the Executive Order that established the Commission. You can read that here: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/...-202000834.htm

The report was to establish a version of history that would be the official version of the Federal government. That would have had far reaching affects.

That report would control the information provided to the public at national parks, monuments, museums, installations, etc. It would control information used for Independence Day celebrations, especially the upcoming 250th anniversary.

It would establish a "Presidential 1776 Award" to recognize student knowledge of the American founding. That would probably mean something like distributing this report to school with a test where it is taught in every school with student's passing the test getting an award.

It would be the basis of information taught during Constitution Day, which would be required by every school that receives Federal funding. It would be used to facilitate, advise upon, and promote other activities to spread this information.

It would be the basis for information under the Program on Enhanced Civics Education. It would be the basis for for the American History and Civics Academies that provide workshops and training to school teachers.

It would prioritize being consistent with this report in available Federal resources and grants from the Department of Education, Department of Defense, and Department of State.

The intention of the report was to be the basis of a widespread information program through many means.
That's kind of scary.

I've had some good things to say about the report, and I think there are good things in it, but my overall attitude toward it should be interpreted more along the lines of "Don't throw the baby out with the bath."

In the report, it talks about the principles on which our government is based, and I think it is very important for those principles to be understood.

I also think those principles are incompatible with a government decree that funding will be cut to those who don't teach the official version of history.
__________________
Yes, yes. I know you're right, but would it hurt you to actually provide some information?
Meadmaker is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2021, 06:22 AM   #100
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 25,226
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Evidence?
There's a whole thread about it. I won't rehash it here.
__________________
Yes, yes. I know you're right, but would it hurt you to actually provide some information?
Meadmaker is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2021, 06:29 AM   #101
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 20,228
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
That's kind of scary.

I've had some good things to say about the report, and I think there are good things in it, but my overall attitude toward it should be interpreted more along the lines of "Don't throw the baby out with the bath."

In the report, it talks about the principles on which our government is based, and I think it is very important for those principles to be understood.

I also think those principles are incompatible with a government decree that funding will be cut to those who don't teach the official version of history.
Can it be said to have principles? 39 people signed it, and they were not asked to vote on whether it properly applied principle X or Y. It seems voting strips meaning, as each voter brings their own interpretation.

Last edited by BobTheCoward; 22nd January 2021 at 06:31 AM.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2021, 06:34 AM   #102
Suddenly
No Punting
 
Suddenly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Not In Follansbee
Posts: 4,118
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Keep in mind that part of America was still fighting to keep slavery in 1865!
More like well into the 20th century. Some southern states developed a legal framework that used the criminal justice system to create an ongoing slave state that didn't start petering out until WWII.

That the 13th amendment contains an exception for punishment for a crime arguably means that the US never banned slavery, and the south used that loophole so blatantly that there wasn't all that much argument about it once reconstruction ended.
Suddenly is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2021, 07:21 AM   #103
lomiller
Penultimate Amazing
 
lomiller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 11,366
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
The point hasn't really been shown to be true, though.
Yes it has.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeli..._abolition.svg

Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post

Spain abolished slavery in 1811.


In 1776 you could not legally own slaves in Spain.
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post


Britain passed the Abolition of Slavery Act in 1833.
in 1776 you could not legally own slaves in England
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post


France abolished slavery for good in 1848.

in 1776 you could not legally own slaves in France

Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post


Russia abolished serfdom (which had come to strongly resemble chattel slavery) in 1906.
in 1776 you could not legally own slaves in Russia. If you want to say serfdom resembles slavery then you should consider that company towns resembled serfdom and the US allowed those into the 1900's.


Were the laws abolishing slaver perfect and spotless, no obviously not, but that isn't the question here. Most of Europe has prohibited slavery in it's home territory by 1776. The US allowing it domestically and even entrenching it in law put it WELL behind most of Europe wrt ending the practice. Full stop end of story.
__________________
"Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen"
lomiller is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2021, 07:37 AM   #104
lomiller
Penultimate Amazing
 
lomiller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 11,366
Originally Posted by ChrisBFRPKY View Post
That's the thing. The Constitution describes the founding fathers vision of what a perfect Government should be. They knew that vision would not come to pass overnight.
The ff were not attempting to reinvent the wheel or create some completely new system of government. They were trying to recreate the system they had lived under prior to emigrating to the Americas. The US constitution adapted the English Parliamentary system to the situation in North America and codified principles that already existed in English Common Law. In the process, some clear improvements were made, but these were things that the English system was evolving towards anyway.
__________________
"Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen"
lomiller is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2021, 09:43 AM   #105
mumblethrax
Species traitor
 
mumblethrax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 2,705
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
There's a whole thread about it. I won't rehash it here.
Maybe point to the thread? It seems true to me, particularly when you consider that the AHA statement wasn't specifically about the Confederacy ("other forms of white supremacy" would presumably cover memorials to those who participated in genocide against indigenous people, as well).

I think it's far more likely that you've gotten this wrong than the AHA has, and a cursory search supports that idea.
mumblethrax is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2021, 09:56 AM   #106
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 25,226
Originally Posted by mumblethrax View Post
Maybe point to the thread? It seems true to me, particularly when you consider that the AHA statement wasn't specifically about the Confederacy ("other forms of white supremacy" would presumably cover memorials to those who participated in genocide against indigenous people, as well).

I think it's far more likely that you've gotten this wrong than the AHA has, and a cursory search supports that idea.
Let's make sure we aren't moving any goalposts here. This is the exact wording of the AHA statement.

"The vast majority of targeted statues, as the AHA has noted before, honor either men who committed treason by violating oaths of office and taking up arms against the United States government, or whose main historical significance lay in their defense of slavery or other forms of white supremacy." (emphasis added)

The only people I know who fit the description, at least among those whose statues were toppled, were figures from the Confederate States of America, and a few legislators who were instrumental in supporting the post-war segregationist system.

There is one aspect of this that is quite germane to the topic of this thread, though. Some people will argue that if they were involved in slavery, or the conquest of the Americas, that that was indeed their main historical significance. Such is the obsession with slavery and other racial issues. So, George Washington's main historical significance, in some people's eyes, is that he was a slaveowner. Ulysses S. Grant's main historical significance was in his support of westward expansion, including actions undertaken against Indians living on the land coveted by the whites of the time. The genesis of the 1776 Commission was the way that modern teachers have placed so much emphasis on race relations in American history that they have ignored everything else. If you are willing to lump Thomas Jefferson into the group of people "whose main historical significance lay in their defense of slavery", then the AHA statement becomes true.
__________________
Yes, yes. I know you're right, but would it hurt you to actually provide some information?

Last edited by Meadmaker; 22nd January 2021 at 10:05 AM.
Meadmaker is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2021, 10:01 AM   #107
Thermal
Penultimate Amazing
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 13,485
Originally Posted by lomiller View Post
Yes it has.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeli..._abolition.svg




In 1776 you could not legally own slaves in Spain.


in 1776 you could not legally own slaves in England


in 1776 you could not legally own slaves in France



in 1776 you could not legally own slaves in Russia. If you want to say serfdom resembles slavery then you should consider that company towns resembled serfdom and the US allowed those into the 1900's.


Were the laws abolishing slaver perfect and spotless, no obviously not, but that isn't the question here. Most of Europe has prohibited slavery in it's home territory by 1776. The US allowing it domestically and even entrenching it in law put it WELL behind most of Europe wrt ending the practice. Full stop end of story.
Whenever England et al abolished slavery, they certainly still allowed it in their territories in 1776. You can't honestly reap the financial benefits by allowing it on your property, while declaring your living room slave-free.

The linked map showing abolition dates is quite interesting. All but the Confederate States had abolished it sooner than the Civil War, as many seem to forget when talking about Americans.

And it seems that Italy and others have not abolished slavery yet (gray colored)?
__________________
We find comfort among those who agree with us, growth among those who don't -Frank A. Clark

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect -Mark Twain
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2021, 10:02 AM   #108
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 6,392
Originally Posted by lomiller View Post
In 1776 you could not legally own slaves in Spain.
The map which you linked above actually says 1837 for Spain.

Originally Posted by lomiller View Post
in 1776 you could not legally own slaves in England
Why did the British Parliament pass the Slavery Abolition Act 1833WP in your understanding? Could any other nation have freed those particular slaves?

Originally Posted by lomiller View Post
in 1776 you could not legally own slaves in France
Why was this 1848 French law necessary? Could any other nation have freed those particular slaves?

Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Whenever England et al abolished slavery, they certainly still allowed it in their territories in 1776. You can't honestly reap the financial benefits by allowing it on your property, while declaring your living room slave-free.
EXACTLY!

It makes no sense to insist on letting European colonial powers off the hook for the global conditions of slavery which they brought about, while giving them credit for not using slaves in their homelands. This includes Portugal and Denmark, along with those listed above.
__________________
"Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin

Last edited by d4m10n; 22nd January 2021 at 10:05 AM.
d4m10n is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2021, 10:09 AM   #109
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 96,954
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
There's a whole thread about it. I won't rehash it here.
Where?
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2021, 10:13 AM   #110
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 96,954
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
Let's make sure we aren't moving any goalposts here. This is the exact wording of the AHA statement.

"The vast majority of targeted statues, as the AHA has noted before, honor either men who committed treason by violating oaths of office and taking up arms against the United States government, or whose main historical significance lay in their defense of slavery or other forms of white supremacy." (emphasis added)

The only people I know who fit the description, at least among those whose statues were toppled, were figures from the Confederate States of America, and a few legislators who were instrumental in supporting the post-war segregationist system.

There is one aspect of this that is quite germane to the topic of this thread, though. Some people will argue that if they were involved in slavery, or the conquest of the Americas, that that was indeed their main historical significance. Such is the obsession with slavery and other racial issues. So, George Washington's main historical significance, in some people's eyes, is that he was a slaveowner. Ulysses S. Grant's main historical significance was in his support of westward expansion, including actions undertaken against Indians living on the land coveted by the whites of the time. The genesis of the 1776 Commission was the way that modern teachers have placed so much emphasis on race relations in American history that they have ignored everything else. If you are willing to lump Thomas Jefferson into the group of people "whose main historical significance lay in their defense of slavery", then the AHA statement becomes true.
You seemed to think your claims was germane to the thread topic so one would expect you to be willing to support your claim. Why can’t you source where your information came from?
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2021, 10:18 AM   #111
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 20,228
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
Let's make sure we aren't moving any goalposts here. This is the exact wording of the AHA statement.

"The vast majority of targeted statues, as the AHA has noted before, honor either men who committed treason by violating oaths of office and taking up arms against the United States government, or whose main historical significance lay in their defense of slavery or other forms of white supremacy." (emphasis added)

The only people I know who fit the description, at least among those whose statues were toppled, were figures from the Confederate States of America, and a few legislators who were instrumental in supporting the post-war segregationist system.

There is one aspect of this that is quite germane to the topic of this thread, though. Some people will argue that if they were involved in slavery, or the conquest of the Americas, that that was indeed their main historical significance. Such is the obsession with slavery and other racial issues. So, George Washington's main historical significance, in some people's eyes, is that he was a slaveowner. Ulysses S. Grant's main historical significance was in his support of westward expansion, including actions undertaken against Indians living on the land coveted by the whites of the time. The genesis of the 1776 Commission was the way that modern teachers have placed so much emphasis on race relations in American history that they have ignored everything else. If you are willing to lump Thomas Jefferson into the group of people "whose main historical significance lay in their defense of slavery", then the AHA statement becomes true.
What you call "racial issues" is murder, rape, and kidnapping. Jefferson is a kidnapper and a rapist. To say that isn't the main historical fact read like the rolling stone headline on Phil Spector, "Phil Spector, the famed ‘Wall of Sound’ producer and architect of some of pop music’s most enduring songs whose legacy was marred by a murder conviction"
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2021, 10:26 AM   #112
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 25,226
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
You seemed to think your claims was germane to the thread topic so one would expect you to be willing to support your claim. Why can’t you source where your information came from?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...hlight=statues


Edited by Agatha:  Edited to remove breach of rule 12




There's actually a list of statues in a wikipedia article that was quoted in that thread. Part of the thread included a running tally, keeping track of Confederate versus not so Confederate statues. I don't remember if we included the post-war segregationists in the "Confederate" side. They would fit the AHA description, even if not confederate.
__________________
Yes, yes. I know you're right, but would it hurt you to actually provide some information?

Last edited by Agatha; 26th January 2021 at 07:08 AM.
Meadmaker is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2021, 10:28 AM   #113
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 25,226
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
What you call "racial issues" is murder, rape, and kidnapping. Jefferson is a kidnapper and a rapist. To say that isn't the main historical fact read like the rolling stone headline on Phil Spector, "Phil Spector, the famed ‘Wall of Sound’ producer and architect of some of pop music’s most enduring songs whose legacy was marred by a murder conviction"
If you think that Jefferson's main historical signifcance was rape and kidnapping, you have proved the point of the 1776 Commission.
__________________
Yes, yes. I know you're right, but would it hurt you to actually provide some information?
Meadmaker is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2021, 10:37 AM   #114
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 20,228
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
If you think that Jefferson's main historical signifcance was rape and kidnapping, you have proved the point of the 1776 Commission.
At least Ariel Castro had the decency to only hold a couple people for years. Jefferson literally did it to hundreds! How is that not the main story?
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2021, 10:49 AM   #115
mumblethrax
Species traitor
 
mumblethrax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 2,705
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
The only people I know who fit the description, at least among those whose statues were toppled, were figures from the Confederate States of America, and a few legislators who were instrumental in supporting the post-war segregationist system.
I'll again point out that professional historians probably have a better grasp on who is known for what than you do--you're proffering an argument from ignorance. Juan de Ońate, for example, is primarily known today for the Acoma Massacre, and his statues are among those that were targeted last summer.

Quote:
There is one aspect of this that is quite germane to the topic of this thread, though. Some people will argue that if they were involved in slavery, or the conquest of the Americas, that that was indeed their main historical significance.
Nobody here is arguing that, and neither is the AHA, so this is just a straw man. The reality is that very few statues of Jefferson, Washington, or Grant were targeted--Confederate memorials targeted easily outnumber all others targeted over the summer.

Quote:
The genesis of the 1776 Commission was the way that modern teachers have placed so much emphasis on race relations in American history that they have ignored everything else.
No. 1776 Commission is a reactionary propaganda response to the 1619 Project by a our last president, and nothing more than that. If you wanted to course correct, you'd presumably invite some historians to contribute.

The section on slavery isn't even the worst of it--the portrayal of early 20th century progressive thinkers as a "challenge to constitutional principles" is thoroughly ridiculous. No ill effects of progressive thought are even identified--they are identified as a threat simply because they failed to adhere to natural law dogma (it shouldn't be necessary to point out that the US constitution is a legal document, and not a philosophical treatise).

The whole thing is just an American version of Juche ideology.

Last edited by mumblethrax; 22nd January 2021 at 10:50 AM.
mumblethrax is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2021, 10:59 AM   #116
Mumbles
Philosopher
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,408
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Evidence?
Here's Wikipedia's list of statues removed "over the summer", for what it's worth.

Sure look like a lot of Confederate and other white supremacist monuments to me, although I didn't do a complete count.
Mumbles is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2021, 11:06 AM   #117
Mumbles
Philosopher
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,408
Originally Posted by mumblethrax View Post
No. 1776 Commission is a reactionary propaganda response to the 1619 Project by a our last president, and nothing more than that. If you wanted to course correct, you'd presumably invite some historians to contribute.

The section on slavery isn't even the worst of it--the portrayal of early 20th century progressive thinkers as a "challenge to constitutional principles" is thoroughly ridiculous. No ill effects of progressive thought are even identified--they are identified as a threat simply because they failed to adhere to natural law dogma (it shouldn't be necessary to point out that the US constitution is a legal document, and not a philosophical treatise).

The whole thing is just an American version of Juche ideology.
The part where MLK Jr is typified by That Same One Quote, while his legacy was betrayed by Calhoun-esque figures after his assassination is the one that drew the most guffaws to me, but yeah, "the end of Child Labor is like Fascism" was notably ridiculous as well. And I rather doubt that Toupee Fiasco actually read any part of the 1619 Project (which was less about the US' founding, and more about how slavery and white supremacy shaped modern society) - the entire thing reads more like a hysterical rant by Dinesh D'Souza or Rush Limbaugh than any proper response.
Mumbles is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2021, 11:06 AM   #118
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 25,226
Originally Posted by Mumbles View Post
Here's Wikipedia's list of statues removed "over the summer", for what it's worth.

Sure look like a lot of Confederate and other white supremacist monuments to me, although I didn't do a complete count.
The 1776 report and the AHA response specifically referred to "defamation" of statues by violence.

If you go to that list and count up the "toppled by protestors" entries, and the like, you will find that there are more non-Confederate than Confederate. At least, as we were keeping a running tally from the entries on that page in the other thread, that was the case.
__________________
Yes, yes. I know you're right, but would it hurt you to actually provide some information?
Meadmaker is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2021, 11:20 AM   #119
mumblethrax
Species traitor
 
mumblethrax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 2,705
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
The 1776 report and the AHA response specifically referred to "defamation" of statues by violence.
No, it doesn't. The 1776 report laments the "defamation" of statues, which it considers a form of violence. On its face, "defamation of statues" is not especially meaningful. We can only guess at what literate people might have written.

The AHA refers to memorials targeted by protesters (which would at least include both those toppled and those threatened with toppling).
mumblethrax is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd January 2021, 11:35 AM   #120
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 25,226
Originally Posted by mumblethrax View Post
No, it doesn't. The 1776 report laments the "defamation" of statues, which it considers a form of violence. On its face, "defamation of statues" is not especially meaningful. We can only guess at what literate people might have written.

The AHA refers to memorials targeted by protesters (which would at least include both those toppled and those threatened with toppling).
Well now we get into those "they might have meant" sort of things.


Here's my point. The AHA said the vast majority of the statues were of people who were traitors against the USA and whose main significance was the defense of slavery and white supremacy.


I know that statues toppled by protestors included several George Washingtons, several Christopher Columbus, one Miguel de Cervantes, and in Portland, Oregon, I'm pretty sure there was at least one beaver. Or maybe it was an elk. I get those confused.

This group of historians want to twist history and say that the wave of statuary destruction was aimed at Confederate monuments. It's not true. It went far beyond that.
__________________
Yes, yes. I know you're right, but would it hurt you to actually provide some information?
Meadmaker is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:17 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.