Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Well Fart Blossom!

Having erased the Confederate battle flag from history, the activists are on to their next historical deletion attempt:

 

http://atlanta.cbslocal.com/2015/07/13/atlanta-naacp-says-they-can-sand-blast-lee-jefferson-and-jackson-off-of-stone-mountain/

 

Stone Mountain Park was built as a Confederate memorial using private funds.   It was later given to the state.  The state uses an entertainment company to operate the park commercially for profit.  The park costs the state nothing and is, in fact, and income stream.

  • 1887 â€“ The Venable Brothers bought all of Stone Mountain for $48,000 and ran the quarrying operations.
  • 1916 â€“ Samuel H. Venable leased the north face of the mountain to the UDC on the condition that a suitable monument be completed in 12 years. Lack of funding and World War I delayed the start of the carving until 1923.
  • April 11, 1956 â€“ The Venable family signs a quit claim deed for the area encompassing Stone Mountain, giving it to Stone Mountain Confederate Memorial, Inc.
  • 1958 â€“ The State of Georgia purchased Stone Mountain and the surrounding land to create a 3,200 acre park. Focus was placed on development for recreation and entertainment and the completion of the carving.
  • Feb. 21, 1958 â€“ Gov. Marvin Griffin signs a bill creating the Stone Mountain Memorial Association, superseding the old Authority.
  • Sept. 19, 1958 â€“ Stone Mountain Confederate Memorial, Inc. gives Stone Mountain to the state of Georgia.
  • 1998 â€“ Herschend Family Entertainment selected to manage the commercial aspects of Stone Mountain Park as part of privatization effort

 

http://www.stonemountainpark.com/about/history

Edited by JoeBob
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 136
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

If one looks at the overall picture of what was going on in 1860, one would have to conclude that the entire "conversation" was centered around the problem of slavery.  Politically most of the congres

So, you really want me to start a Confederate Flag thread so we can re-fight the War of Northern Aggression?

You jest, but our one patrol (the Rebels, and yes their patch is what you think it is, and yes we have two black and two Native Americans in the patrol) asked the PLC if they had to change their name.

Talk about deletion:

 

1923 - Sam Venable grants the KKK an easement to the top of Stone Mountain.  The easement remained in place until Stone Mountain was purchased by the State of Georgia in 1958.

 

Source: Historic Dekalb County: An Illustrated History By Vivian Price page 49-51:  https://books.google.com/books?id=WZX25KMqgKUC&pg=PA49&dq=Venable+Brothers&hl=en&sa=X&ei=-5FFUrnILYS69QTCs4CIAg&ved=0CFgQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=Venable%20Brothers&f=false

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is going around the internet.....

 

Just for  the record: Confederate soldiers, sailors, and Marines that fought in the Civil war were made U.S. Veterans by an act of Congress in in 1957, U.S. Public Law 85-425, Sec 410, Approved 23 May, 1958.  This made all Confederate Army/Navy/Marine Veterans equal to U.S. Veterans.  Additionally, under U.S. Public Law 810, Approved by the 17th Congress on 26 Feb 1929 the War Department was directed to erect headstones and recognize Confederate grave sites as U.S. War dead grave sites.  Just for the record the last Confederate veteran died in 1958.  So, in essence, when you remove a Confederate statue, monument or headstone, you are in fact, removing a statue, monument or head stone of a U.S. VETERAN.

 

If that be the case, then has it just become politically correct to disrespect our veterans?  Kinda makes one at least pause and ponder.  I guess my journey every Memorial Day to put Confederate 3rd National Flags on confederate veteran graves will soon be something someone's going to sue me over.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Talk about deletion:

 

1923 - Sam Venable grants the KKK an easement to the top of Stone Mountain.  The easement remained in place until Stone Mountain was purchased by the State of Georgia in 1958.

 

Source: Historic Dekalb County: An Illustrated History By Vivian Price page 49-51:  https://books.google.com/books?id=WZX25KMqgKUC&pg=PA49&dq=Venable+Brothers&hl=en&sa=X&ei=-5FFUrnILYS69QTCs4CIAg&ved=0CFgQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=Venable%20Brothers&f=false

 

Not sure that I understand your point.  Should the mountain be blasted out of existence because the KKK once held a rally there?  Then lots of Southern towns will have to go as well.

 

Ancestors relate that George Washington had unprotected sexual relations with some of his slaves.  What do you propose we replace the Washington Monument with?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Got to thinking (dangerous proposition, I know) but if Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson and Bedford Forrest are US Veterans are they not heroes, too?  Makes for a kind of an interesting debate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yawn, how successful was the NAACP in preventing the Martin Luthor King statue from being done offshore by sculptor Lei Yixin of Changsha, China using Chinese granite.

 

Let the NAACP erase that piece of crap first, before they give any thought to even proposing erasing a real work of beauty (best viewed at night).

 

2014-07-11-14.13.28.jpg
 

Edited by RememberSchiff
Link to post
Share on other sites

No doubt, this has gotten silly.  Just a quick search on http://www.britannica.com/topic/The-Founding-Fathers-and-Slavery-1269536 shows that Washington, Jefferson and Franklin (among others) were all slave holders.  So clearly they all need to be taken off folding money, monuments in DC need to be taken down, and Washington and Jefferson should be blasted off Mt. Rushmore.  We should also blast Lincoln off of Rushmore since he once said if he could save the union by not ending slavery he would.  Clearly not a team player.

 

Now, according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_slave_trade, the Portuguese, British, French and Dutch were all on the African side of the slave trade.  Given that "we" were British colonies at the time, we clearly need to purge all references to any cultural activity of any of those four nationalities.  Boycotts of tulips, champagne, Dr. Who (and other bad Brit TV) and corks are in order.  Clearly the State Department should ban travel to all four.  The same article references centuries of African enslavement by muslim countries so clearly the Nation of Islam must be banned as a racist organization.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really want to be part of this discussion but, walk in the woods, I really dont think Benjamin Franklin was ever a slave-owner. Washington and Jefferson, sure, but not Franklin. As far as I know he was an abolitionist. If you have any evidence to the contrary, I'd sure like to know what it is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really want to be part of this discussion but, walk in the woods, I really dont think Benjamin Franklin was ever a slave-owner. Washington and Jefferson, sure, but not Franklin. As far as I know he was an abolitionist. If you have any evidence to the contrary, I'd sure like to know what it is.

 

 

NJCubScouter yes all three were at one time slave owners. What walk in the woods omitted to say is that although they owned slaves at one time or another all three also fought in there own ways to eliminate slavery. Not long after the Revolution Franklin got rid of all his slaves and became president of the Pennsylvania Abolition Society. In fact Franklin presented to the First Federal Congress a petition to abolish slavery and the slave trade. I have heard these types of statements before but once you look and see any African American would look pretty bad trying to make these founding fathers look bad. Cosidering all three at least wanted to do away with it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think many of the Founding Fathers were pro-slavery and were working hard on eliminating it.  The only reason the slavery issue was not addressed in the original documents was to entice and keep the southern colonies in the fight for independence.  Their writings indicate this quite clearly.  It was a kind of a necessary evil kind of approach to getting everyone on board with the revolution.

 

Soon after the revolution the whole issue of slavery was waning because of the low price of cotton and high cost of slave maintenance.  Had it not been for Eli Whitney's invention of the cotton gin, slavery would have died out on it's own.  Just another bright idea from the industrial revolution.  Some of Whitney's writings indicated a sense of regret for having made the invention.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Jefferson wanted to do away with slavery but also wanted to get the blacks out of the U.S. too. He saw a good amount of the prejudice between whites and blacks, even in the northern states. He new that freeing them would bring civil unrest in the country. I think he had also come up with an idea of giving them their own land outside our borders. I guess it would be something like what we did to the Indians and put them on reservations.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Jefferson wanted to do away with slavery but also wanted to get the blacks out of the U.S. too. He saw a good amount of the prejudice between whites and blacks, even in the northern states. He new that freeing them would bring civil unrest in the country. I think he had also come up with an idea of giving them their own land outside our borders. I guess it would be something like what we did to the Indians and put them on reservations.

 

Prior to the Emancipation Proclamation, the sending them back to Africa was Lincoln's solution as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This debate boggles my mind.  20 or so years ago, the only people I knew who claimed the Civil War wasn't about slavery were racist blacks or left-wingers who didn't want to give the North/Republicans/Lincoln/etc. any credit for going to war to free the slaves.  Was slavery the only issue?  Not by a long shot but it was the primary issue.

 

What disturbs me today is the heavy emphasis on imagery over substance by the "social justice warriors" (e.g., removal of "Dukes of Hazard" episodes or items for sale while Che Guevara and Nazi memorabilia is allowed) and deliberate misinterpretations of law and Constitution that have taken hold in the legal system over the last 20-30 years.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The more polarized the nation gets, the worse it will become.

 

No one in 1860 thought the issue would ever come to a shooting war either.  We had legislators beating each other half to death on the floor of Congress, but it was just a minor inconvenience at the time.   The pro-slavery Democrats of the south just couldn't work it out within their own party and were easy prey for the new 3rd party Republicans.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

If I may, this thread was discussing racism and segregation.

 

I know around here they had racially segregated Scout troops and camps up until the 1950's. Does anyone here have experience when troops started integrating?

 

I know from the video of the 1953 National Scout Jamboree their were some black scouts present LINK.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...