Shooting at SC Church During Bible Study - Suspect still at large

[drbrumley]

A symbol understood well enough by the murderer who was proud to associate with it.

Only ignorance makes it racist. And he was ignorant. And a criminal.

Conservative: Get the guy who committed the crime.
Liberal: Get the guy who committed the crime, and outlaw a flag.

Wonders if the American flag would receive this kinda ignorant treatment if he was wrapped up in that.

 

[rainee]

Thank you. I've used it for quite some time, since I took high school Latin.

Well they say when you find something right you should stick with it, smile.

Whereas I fear that you are buying into a convoluted rationalization scheme intended to rewrite the past in the favor of slavers, segregationists, and racists.

No I'm not in favor of slavers. I may be for separating men from women, and other dividing factors of people for certain times or happenings, you know? But that may not fit a segregation definition.

I do not want rewrite history either, but y'all come closer to denial than I did I think.

Well, of course it did, and does. Humans are always subject to any number of cognitive biases and prejudices. But the answer to that is to examine what the record actually records, and there is actually a fair bit of clarity to be had.

Yes, exactly. And the person saying this also said a Federal Fort remained a Federal Fort after the land it sat on was in a seceded state.
So look at it this way, it was only four score and a handful of years before then that these places were turning into who they were and no longer merely 13 British Colonies.


Compare that to the one hundred and fifty something years it's been since what we are talking about...

Of course. But while the Union was far from perfect as it existed in the 1860s as well as today, what the Confederacy offered was undeniably far worse, being a state explicitly founded upon human ownership.

Yes. And thank goodness the North stopped slavery in their area first at least then they could be better at self righteousness, right.

And that justifies forcing people to work the crop because you can't think of an economical way to do the work otherwise?

You do understand people did do the same work, same hard labor but hopefully had home and food when the labor wasn't needed for a few months, yes? Eventually there would be machinery to greatly help. I posted about it. Till then cotton was still in demand, the poor worked for wages.

Have you read the things that Southern thought leaders wrote about slavery, and it's supposed virtues?

I have read some. They sounded to me like they thought the North wanted to either get a huge cut of their income or stop their ability to make a huge income. I do not know of any writer but A
Lincoln who wrote as both one who cared about both principle and politics. Show me another Yank back then that did value humans highly, please.

...
You could also point out that prior to the closing of the Atlantic slave trade, many in the North were perfectly happy to make their living off of the filthy industry, and that the rise in the abolitionist movement coincides with the transition of the slave system into a regional interest.

Yes but you did it so well.

But that still doesn't change the fundamental moral calculus of human ownership.

For a Christian like myself slavery was doomed for Christians if they wanted to be Christians free from being convicted by the Bible.
However, nothing like that protects employees who may feel helpless and forced in order to live. YOU may not care about things like this... But I do.

If it took a change in the economic situation to make the moral situation clearer, then better sooner than later.

We differ here, but child labor laws and other such things have made things better.

If tenement farming was such a great system by comparison, why did the South require laws that stripped the former slaves of the normal freedoms that this country was supposedly built to protect?

Please don't be a dummy now at this late date. Tenement farming is not great. And the South did not have laws that stripped former slaves of freedoms - it did try to control something, I think. But I don't want to get into that. Have you looked at what was done to the South?

You still aren't dealing with the fundamental nature of slavery in the South.

Yes well it was a hundred and fifty something years ago.

... There's nothing illegitimate about not wishing to compete with countries that don't follow fair labor practices. That's still the subject of a great deal of our free trade diplomacy, as American workers have a right to be worried that if we open up trade with other countries that don't have robust worker protections in place, they'll end up competing for jobs against people very nearly in slave conditions themselves. It degrades all of us to permit that, even as it makes some goods cheaper and thus more accessible...

Wow are you glad you didn't live in Colonial days? You would've been a Tory!! A pro Brit colonial! A Benedict Arnold!

Unlike Town who is only partially a turncoat.

Yeah, that can happen when you commit yourself to aggressive human rights violations on a mass scale. People stop letting you run your own affairs. The period of reconstruction was intolerable to the South, but it was necessary, and it should have been longer to really achieve what it had set out to do. And before long, the former slave states were back to mostly getting their way, no longer formally holding slaves, but negating in significant part the hard-won freedom of many of their citizens again. Even if the South once had something to complain about here, they no longer do, and didn't for nearly a century before the Civil Rights era.

I can't read that above but at a glance it looks shallow...

I live in the West.

Oh, another one who reads about this stuff and thinks about it but doesn't have clue about living it?? Great.

Gotta go
Oh wait...

No one needs to tell black people what the war was about. They lived the reality of it.

The black people of today ARE living something.
It's not slavery. Duh.

But something needs to change - yes it does.
But I'm not going to let empty headed liberals over simplify and thus encourage a race war...

I don't follow.

Reality? Yes. Apparently.

Then it seems you're as eager to change what the killer said he was trying to do as you are to read a different motive into the actions of the South. Like his forebearers, the killer was pretty clear about what he was trying to do, and there are just a fair number of people who can't face that fact honestly. He didn't just go into any church. He went into a church with certain membership, and history. The sooner you face that fact, the better we'll all be.



So, by your calculus, angry, mostly peaceful, black people in the North demanding what are supposed to be Constitutional rights and something like equal treatment are a mob that justifies violence against innocent people. But white Southerners engaging in armed insurrection is a worthy attempt to preserve states' rights regardless of their underlying reasoning? There couldn't be a clearer demonstration that the work of Reconstruction was left unfinished.



Strange how looking to tomorrow seems to involve resurrecting a false narrative of an imaginary past.

Bbl8ter

 

[rainee]

I find what you have to say about race to be insulting in general. You're not a well person.



You're a racist, and a snake in the grass.



I don't, actually. But thanks for thinking of it.

I am NOT a snake in the grass. Earlier you tried to say my mask had slipped. I am NOT impeachable baby doll. I can't help it if you keep alluding to some way I have let you down when I say things. I am true.
What were you hoping for anyway? Start talking straight or stop playing this same saw.

 

[Town Heretic]

Only ignorance makes it racist. And he was ignorant. And a criminal.

No, it's ignorance that finds it palpable or, to others, it may simply be a necessary evil in need of whitewashing to advance another banner altogether.

Conservative: Get the guy who committed the crime.
Liberal: Get the guy who committed the crime, and outlaw a flag.

Taking a symbol of a defeated, slave promoting, racist government down from the seat of actual power isn't outlawing its existence.

No one has outlawed the Klan or denied them speech, by way of.

Wonders if the American flag would receive this kinda ignorant treatment if he was wrapped up in that.

Ignorance is pretending a battle flag of the Confederacy is a symbol worth venerating instead of repudiating.

 

[Eeset]

Town you are being quite disingenuous. You actually know the culture in Mississippi and Alabama quite well. You know, by way of example, that whites did and a majority there still do consider blacks to be inferior. I'm sure the same can be said for some places in some other states as well.

 

[Town Heretic]

Town you are being quite disingenuous.

Not in the least. In what particular?

You actually know the culture in Mississippi and Alabama quite well.You know, by way of example, that whites did and a majority there still do consider blacks to be inferior.

I don't at all. I'd say it's likely you'd get a very different sense, depending on the age of the person you were talking to and the particular geography.

For instance, along the coasts the Southern mentality is very different than it is in the hinterlands of both states and racial attitudes among my parents' set is very different from those found in people in the generations that followed, with each successive one holding a more liberal view on that particular. Interracial dating and coupling, by way of, doesn't draw a raised eyebrow among people with children of their own here.

There are pockets of ignorance of every age in any place, but I have a more optimistic view and experience than you.

I'm sure the same can be said for some places in some other states as well.

Northern and Southern, the distinctions being more a generational than geographical consideration these days.

 

[Eeset]

disingenuous = not candid or sincere, typically by pretending that one knows less about something than one really does.

 

[Town Heretic]

disingenuous = not candid or sincere, typically by pretending that one knows less about something than one really does.

I know what it means. The last part isn't applicable, given you manage to be disingenuous often enough while pretending to know more than you do about a thing. As with the sweeping pronouncement on the South you made for no better reason than to set this up.

lain:

Disingenuous: not truly honest or sincere : giving the false appearance of being honest or sincere. Merriam-Webster

The definition isn't: disagreeing with someone who can't distinguish between neg rep and rape or who confuses the blood in her eye with the color of the air around her.

 

[drbrumley]

Ignorance is pretending a battle flag of the Confederacy is a symbol worth venerating instead of repudiating.

Your opinion noted. Do you repudiate the American flag for the attempted genocide of the American Indian? Talk about an outright hatred. If ignoramous A goes to a reservation and opens fire at some Indians in a church and the guy has a manifesto and ehchos Lincoln, Grant, Sherman words against the Indian and wraps himself up in a flag of the United States, are we gonna whine about the American flag being a symbol of genocide? I didn't think so.

Do you repudiate the American flag for slavery in this nation in the first place? Didn't think so either

 

[rexlunae]

No I'm not in favor of slavers.

Just in favor of defending them.

I may be for separating men from women, and other dividing factors of people for certain times or happenings, you know? But that may not fit a segregation definition.

I'm not even inclined to broach the subject here.

I do not want rewrite history either, but y'all come closer to denial than I did I think.

That you think that is a result of your willingness to follow an alternative narrative invented to protect segregationists and slave-holders.

Yes, exactly. And the person saying this also said a Federal Fort remained a Federal Fort after the land it sat on was in a seceded state.

Does federal ownership of land depend on what states do now too? You do realize that this is one of the powers explicitly vested in Congress by the Constitution, right? Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2, look it up.

So look at it this way, it was only four score and a handful of years before then that these places were turning into who they were and no longer merely 13 British Colonies.

So?

Compare that to the one hundred and fifty something years it's been since what we are talking about...

What comparison do you think applies? The length of time? Well yes, it's been longer since the Civil War than it was from the Revolution to the Civil War. And it was an even longer time between the Revolution and the founding of Rome.

Yes. And thank goodness the North stopped slavery in their area first at least then they could be better at self righteousness, right.

But since THEY DIDN'T START THE CIVIL WAR, that isn't particularly relevant, now is it?

You do understand people did do the same work, same hard labor but hopefully had home and food when the labor wasn't needed for a few months, yes? Eventually there would be machinery to greatly help. I posted about it. Till then cotton was still in demand, the poor worked for wages.

The key difference is that the weren't human property. They could leave, barring laws on the books that the South passed to try to recreate some aspects of slavery.

I have read some. They sounded to me like they thought the North wanted to either get a huge cut of their income or stop their ability to make a huge income.

Based on what?

I do not know of any writer but A
Lincoln who wrote as both one who cared about both principle and politics. Show me another Yank back then that did value humans highly, please.

John Brown.

For a Christian like myself slavery was doomed for Christians if they wanted to be Christians free from being convicted by the Bible.
However, nothing like that protects employees who may feel helpless and forced in order to live. YOU may not care about things like this... But I do.

That's great, but if you were born in another era, the evidence is that you could very well have been both a dedicated and sincere Christian and a supporter of slavery.

We differ here, but child labor laws and other such things have made things better.

Differ how? Are you saying that the labor conditions that exist after the Civil War were no better than slavery?

Please don't be a dummy now at this late date. Tenement farming is not great. And the South did not have laws that stripped former slaves of freedoms - it did try to control something, I think. But I don't want to get into that. Have you looked at what was done to the South?

Yes, they did:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Codes_(United_States)

Black codes existed before the war to prevent the freedmen from getting too "uppity", but they continued after the war to ensure white supremacy and to make it more difficult for the freed former slaves to actually experience freedom.

Yes well it was a hundred and fifty something years ago.

And yet the consequences are still with us.

Wow are you glad you didn't live in Colonial days? You would've been a Tory!! A pro Brit colonial! A Benedict Arnold!

Unlike Town who is only partially a turncoat.

Because if you're for one rebellion, you must be for all rebellions, right?

I don't really know retrospectively which side I would have been on, but that doesn't follow from my position as I've laid it out. What matters to me in all such cases is which side has the greater burden of justice in their cause, not some arbitrary commitment to prefer union or disunion indiscriminately.

I can't read that above but at a glance it looks shallow...

Ok......is there some reason that you can't read it. Otherwise I'd point out that the apparent depth is likely a result of the reading rather than the writing.

 

[Town Heretic]

Your opinion noted. Do you repudiate the American flag for the attempted genocide of the American Indian?

No. I repudiate the act, which wasn't the cornerstone of American independence. It's a poor parallel. There wasn't an actual program of extermination, only a cruel indifference and willingness to inflict deprivation to a conquered people. Our flag flew over more than a few historic wrongs. And it also flew over the people who righted them.

...If ignoramous A goes to a reservation and opens fire at some Indians in a church and the guy has a manifesto and ehchos Lincoln, Grant, Sherman words against the Indian and wraps himself up in a flag of the United States, are we gonna whine about the American flag being a symbol of genocide? I didn't think so.

Let me cut through this: what I find objectionable is the thing itself and what it represents, what it came into existence to defend and preserve. That some hate filled doofus acted in a way that stirred the national debate and consideration on the point I mark as a public good (to be pulled from a tragedy) and one overdue (the discussion).

Do you repudiate the American flag for slavery in this nation in the first place? Didn't think so either

You can always tell when someone isn't listening. They ask a question and then answer it for you.

I have, on many occasions here, repudiated our founding fathers for the moral cowardice and hypocritical largess they exercised at our founding. I don't ennoble the ignoble, though the work they began and the government they formed, even as it functioned contrary to the principles stated, was and is worth honoring. Else, supra.

 

[Eeset]

Did you ever date anyone who was not a wasp?

Did you retire young on inherited wealth?

 

[rainee]

Town you are being quite disingenuous. You actually know the culture in Mississippi and Alabama quite well. You know, by way of example, that whites did and a majority there still do consider blacks to be inferior. I'm sure the same can be said for some places in some other states as well.

I don't know that Town should be such an expert on
Mississippi, or even Alabama.

I know a little about Rome, New York; Waco, Texas; and LA (Lower Alabama, Florida)

But Eeset, what do you know about Alabama or Mississippi?

When I was in the third grade I saw a slightly older boy demanding lunch money from a boy in the hall in Rome NY. Two friends of the bully were standing around the two and apparently saw me staring like a dumb southern girl...later a small gang of about five or six chased me to my front step, the bully punched me in the stomach (not as hard perhaps as he could have) and told me to mind my own business. And as for race Rome had Irish, Puerto Rican, Italian. But they already had gangs in elementary school. Waco didn't, South Carolina didn't, Florida didn't.

 

[bybee]

Did you ever date anyone who was not a wasp?

Did you retire young on inherited wealth?

And this is relevant how? and to what?
Would you like to tell us your own personal details?

 

[Eeset]

But Eeset, what do you know about Alabama or Mississippi?

Quite a bit actually. I had an uncle who was born and raised in Jackson, Mississippi. Decades ago I spent some time in Alabama. Enough time to experience the culture there.

My family did not migrate to the US until after the civil war so I (we) had no side in that war. But I grew up in Kentucky and attended school in Tennessee so I was surrounded by people who were descendants from civil war adversaries.

Later I spent considerable time in both Georgia and Virginia. I also worked in New Orleans and spent some time in East Texas. I now live in Florida. So, with the exceptions of West Virginia, Arkansas, North and South Carolina I have experienced considerable "southern culture".

Does that answer your question?

 

[rainee]

Quite a bit actually. I had an uncle who was born and raised in Jackson, Mississippi. Decades ago I spent some time in Alabama. Enough time to experience the culture there.

My family did not migrate to the US until after the civil war so I (we) had no side in that war. But I grew up in Kentucky and attended school in Tennessee so I was surrounded by people who were descendants from civil war adversaries.

Later I spent considerable time in both Georgia and Virginia. I also worked in New Orleans and spent some time in East Texas. I now live in Florida. So, with the exceptions of West Virginia, Arkansas, North and South Carolina I have experienced considerable "southern culture".

Does that answer your question?

Good Morning Eeset,
I do yes indeed appreciate a skimming like that though not to be a hog about it I would have liked maybe one or two details...
Being around white people in the South does count...
My friend, I have been friends with people who were not white like me. Have you?
And been friends with people who were white like me who either went to an all black college up north, or dated a black man.
This discussion on this subject at this level sounds ridiculous. I would be too embarrassed to ever say any things like this save for the amazing ability for white liberals to not have any real experience and yet be so abjectly judgmental. It's quite amazing as I said and should not be allowed without their making full disclosure. They are great judges because they lack so much in any real way.

Judging the whites of the South is probably not a good idea.
Firstly because even if they are prejudiced they live with people of color and would not hurt anyone.

I still don't know what the term "racism" means. I only know there can be hate crimes which are wrong and have to be stopped.

But there can also be a prejudice which is not right but as Town said has been continuously declining and that does not necessarily hurt anyone but possibly the one who has it.

I see no reason to let liberals or black Americans put those two groups together as if they were one when they are not. Lying to oneself is still lying, IMHO.

But Eeset thank you for this that you gave. Well done

 

[Granite]

Southern whites aren't exempt from criticism. What is this, a joke?

 

[rainee]

Y'all I worked for a few years for the State of Texas with the mentally retarded and mentally ill.
There were whites, blacks and Hispanics there on both sides - both as employees and as clients.

I hope if you don't have that kind of experience you will recognize you may not know many things about people and that includes the people of the South. I don't know a lot about people but have tried to say often I could be wrong or don't know...

Thanx for flying

 

[rainee]

Southern whites aren't exempt from criticism. What is this, a joke?

Granite what is this with you?

Tamboura had thread about songs that started with men's names and one of my last posts was about Carole King's Jazzman because I could NOT post the one I wanted to, namely Smackwater Jack. She is one of the greatest song writers and I hate that song yet that song is the one you need to consider now and what is wrong with this whole confederate flag, jump on the south baloney, and calling me a racist garbage!

 

[Granite]

Tamboura had thread about songs that started with men's names and one of my last posts was about Carole King's Jazzman because I could NOT post the one I wanted to, namely Smackwater Jack. She is one of the greatest song writers and I hate that song yet that song is the one you need to consider now and what is wrong with this whole confederate flag, jump on the south baloney, and call me a racist garbage!

What in the world are you babbling about?