Racism in the Military

[nittany03]

I think that the detail that is lost is that political and military leaders used to put allegiance to the states over the federal government.

From a moral 'what do I do perspective,' Lee was faced with three choices:

1) Support the Union. This would abandon his values of allegiance to state over federal government.

2) Support the Confederacy, even though he understood the cause was dubious.

3) Resign his commission, which he viewed as an act of cowardice.

Thomas Jefferson used to refer to Virginia as 'my country.' We can't lose sight of this mentality when we analyze the decisions of civil war leaders to declare their allegiance. We also shouldn't lose sight of the rampid racism that existed in the north. Justice Clarence Thomas said the most racist place he ever lived was the northeast US. NY remains as one of the top 5 most segregated cities in America.

He took up arms in betrayal of his oath to the Constitution in order to defend the right of white people to own and sell other human beings as property. I say again. He took up arms in betrayal of his oath to the Constitution in order to defend the right of white people to sell other human beings as property.

The Founding Fathers, for all their human flaws, rose in rebellion in order to further the cause of universal human rights, even if it was inadequately developed in their day. They and the rest of the American revolutionaries still did more to further that cause than arguably anyone else of their generation in the entire world.

The Confederates, on the other hand, rose in rebellion in a regressive movement that sought to deny those God-given rights to a class of people who had as much of a right to them as you or me. Why is this so difficult for you to condemn?

 

[Spekkio]

Why is this so difficult for you to condemn?

First, let me get this out here: I think anyone that currently flies a Confederate flag should be arrested for treason. That is a symbol for violent rebellion against the United States.

But if we're going to study and analyze history, dismissing Lee as simply a traitor who abandoned his oath is not only overly simplistic, but ultimately completely wrong.

In the post WWII era, our federal government has grown in scope and power far beyond what the founding fathers envisioned (I blame the 16th Amendment). We cannot analyze the decisions of 19th century leaders by late 20th and 21st century values. In the 18th-19th centuries, states mattered more than Washington DC, and Congress mattered more than the President.

 

[FinkUFreaky]

He took up arms in betrayal of his oath to the Constitution in order to defend the right of white people to own and sell other human beings as property. I say again. He took up arms in betrayal of his oath to the Constitution in order to defend the right of white people to sell other human beings as property.

The Founding Fathers, for all their human flaws, rose in rebellion in order to further the cause of universal human rights, even if it was inadequately developed in their day. They and the rest of the American revolutionaries still did more to further that cause than arguably anyone else of their generation in the entire world.

The Confederates, on the other hand, rose in rebellion in a regressive movement that sought to deny those God-given rights to a class of people who had as much of a right to them as you or me. Why is this so difficult for you to condemn?

A very large part of me agrees with you. But (there's the "but, or however") I wasn't alive in the 1860s. Or in the previous millennia, where slavery was the norm in the world. It's hard to judge a lot of people from both sides of the aisle from the 1960's on a lot of issues (sexual predation, womens rights, minority rights, etc) let alone a century prior. I think @Spekkio made a pretty cogent argument on how much more important state loyalty was at the time. If you lived in the south, and stuck with the union, you'd be fighting your families "new" country. Moral acceptance of a lot of things change over time. And it's good for the oppressed to push the boundaries to get equality (before someone quotes that and says I'm equating slavery to oppression, I'm not). But even in the last twenty years acceptance has been gained for a lot of groups by a lot of groups. 160 years is a far different timeframe. But keep judging them by 2020 standards. I'm sure if you were born in the south in the 1830s, you would have made the "right" decision.

Edit: Addendum. A lot of people don't like to think this. But if you yourself were born in Germany to the right (or wrong) family, you might have become a NAZI. Even fairly good people can do terrible things. I think Man in the Tall Castle is a great modern interpretation. I'd like to think I'd have revolted and died in the cause, but I have no idea what I would have done with a completely different upbringing around a completely different ethos.

 

[nittany03]

I find it delightfully amusing that those southerners today who decry the “erasing of history,” would, more than likely, be unable to list the belligerents from WWII, or locate North Korea on a map, or any other significant detail about history. I‘m not interested in letting rubes make important decisions.

Wow. I have no support for honoring the Southern cause, but this is still so amazingly condescending that I'm really struggling to wrap my brain around it. We've been discussing a different and much more pernicious form of prejudice in this thread, but that doesn't make it the only kind of prejudice out there.

Do you honestly believe that everyone who disagrees with you, right or wrong, is just a rube?

 

[HAL Pilot]

Do you honestly believe that everyone who disagrees with you, right or wrong, is just a rube?

Why does this surprise you? He’s acted that way for years.

 

[JTS11]

I find it delightfully amusing that those southerners today who decry the “erasing of history,” would, more than likely, be unable to list the belligerents from WWII, or locate North Korea on a map, or any other significant detail about history. I‘m not interested in letting rubes make important decisions.

You could probably say the same thing about a large majority of the protestors.

 

[FinkUFreaky]

A very large part of me agrees with you. But (there's the "but, or however") I wasn't alive in the 1860s. Or in the previous millennia, where slavery was the norm in the world. It's hard to judge a lot of people from both sides of the aisle from the 1960's on a lot of issues (sexual predation, womens rights, minority rights, etc) let alone a century prior. I think @Spekkio made a pretty cogent argument on how much more important state loyalty was at the time. If you lived in the south, and stuck with the union, you'd be fighting your families "new" country. Moral acceptance of a lot of things change over time. And it's good for the oppressed to push the boundaries to get equality (before someone quotes that and says I'm equating slavery to oppression, I'm not). But even in the last twenty years acceptance has been gained for a lot of groups by a lot of groups. 160 years is a far different timeframe. But keep judging them by 2020 standards. I'm sure if you were born in the south in the 1830s, you would have made the "right" decision.

Edit: Addendum. A lot of people don't like to think this. But if you yourself were born in Germany to the right (or wrong) family, you might have become a NAZI. Even fairly good people can do terrible things. I think Man in the Tall Castle is a great modern interpretation. I'd like to think I'd have revolted and died in the cause, but I have no idea what I would have done with a completely different upbringing around a completely different ethos.

And I just realized, I didn't end my post how I wanted. If I had been born a German NAZI, I would still have been in the wrong. And likely to the benefit of humanity, would lose (and die) to the Allied forces. But deciding what was right 160 years ago using today's moral compass isn't really right either.

 

[Brett327]

Wow. I have no support for honoring the Southern cause, but this is still so amazingly condescending that I'm really struggling to wrap my brain around it. We've been discussing a different and much more pernicious form of prejudice in this thread, but that doesn't make it the only kind of prejudice out there.

Do you honestly believe that everyone who disagrees with you, right or wrong, is just a rube?

Of course not, but to the extent that stupid people are out there shaking their fists at statues being removed, I’m not inclined to give their takes much weight.

 

[Griz882]

I find it delightfully amusing that those southerners today who decry the “erasing of history,” would, more than likely, be unable to list the belligerents from WWII, or locate North Korea on a map, or any other significant detail about history. I‘m not interested in letting rubes make important decisions.

Curious...another person who failed, entirely, to read what was written. I find it delightfully amusing when the under-educated layer their lack of knowledge over a conversation in an attempt to sound intelligent.

 

[Griz882]

I think that the detail that is lost is that political and military leaders used to put allegiance to the states over the federal government. This value system didn't fully shift until the 20th century and WWI/II.

From a moral 'what do I do perspective,' Lee was faced with three choices:

1) Support the Union. This would abandon his values of allegiance to state over federal government.

2) Support the Confederacy, even though he understood the cause was dubious.

3) Resign his commission, which he viewed as an act of cowardice.

Thomas Jefferson used to refer to Virginia as 'my country.' We can't lose sight of this mentality when we analyze the decisions of civil war leaders to declare their allegiance. We also shouldn't lose sight of the rampid racism that existed in the north. Justice Clarence Thomas said the most racist place he ever lived was the northeast US. NY remains as one of the top 5 most segregated cities in America; it's broken up to [insert race/ethnicity/religion] neighborhoods.

Good post, but I find most contemporary people unable to think beyond their shallow mindset. It is not their fault, it is the state of their education. When offered facts, allegory, or similarities they run and hide screaming “Straw man...straw man!” Not actually knowing what it means.

 

[DanMa1156]

I think that the detail that is lost is that political and military leaders used to put allegiance to the states over the federal government. This value system didn't fully shift until the 20th century and WWI/II.

From a moral 'what do I do perspective,' Lee was faced with three choices:

1) Support the Union. This would abandon his values of allegiance to state over federal government.

2) Support the Confederacy, even though he understood the cause was dubious.

3) Resign his commission, which he viewed as an act of cowardice.

Thomas Jefferson used to refer to Virginia as 'my country.' We can't lose sight of this mentality when we analyze the decisions of civil war leaders to declare their allegiance. We also shouldn't lose sight of the rampid racism that existed in the north. Justice Clarence Thomas said the most racist place he ever lived was the northeast US. NY remains as one of the top 5 most segregated cities in America; it's broken up to [insert race/ethnicity/religion] neighborhoods.

To which my response would be:

1. Regardless of the value of allegiance to states at the time, they all swore to defend and protect the constitution of the United States (referencing former Union servicememebers turned Confederate)
2. Reference one Admiral David G. Farragut - southerner who understood his oath and fought for the Constitution; yet I see no statues of him throughout the south or bases named after him. Crazy.

 

[Griz882]

To which my response would be:

1. Regardless of the value of allegiance to states at the time, they all swore to defend and protect the constitution of the United States (referencing former Union servicememebers turned Confederate)
2. Reference one Admiral David G. Farragut - southerner who understood his oath and fought for the Constitution; yet I see no statues of him throughout the south or bases named after him. Crazy.

With reference to Farragut, you would be mistaken. There is at least one statue of him in Tennessee where he was born and one on Florida. To the best of my knowledge, and I am willing to be corrected here, no Navy bases are named after people (where parts of them are). That would be a good idea for the army...Fort Fayetteville, Fort Killeen and so on. We could avoid all controversy and name warships after geographic, oceanographic, and similar locations. The USS George Washington could become the USS Atlantic Ocean.

 

[taxi1]

All of your WWI, WWII...heroes will all be torn down just as quickly as Bragg, or any other.

No one's been coming after the "namesakes" of Cecil Field, Apollo Soucek Field (Oceana), Saufley, Camp Pendleton, NAS Key West, NAS Whidbey Island, West Point, Fort Huachuca, etc. There’s a few winners out there waiting to be picked.

This value system...We can't lose sight of this mentality...

Yeah, I was mostly raised in the south and essentially “fought for the south” for a lot of years. Never underestimate the power of an upbringing and the culture you’re immersed in. The “command climate”.

The sheer normalness of this sort of thing back then, given today’s perspective, is mind-boggling. Hard to look at, frankly, but it’s our history. Google on “slave ads”. This is what they fought to preserve. Humans sold as livestock.

https://static.boredpanda.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/slave-sale-ads-6-5ae23557cd257__605.jpg

 

[HAL Pilot]

Regardless of the value of allegiance to states at the time, they all swore to defend and protect the constitution of the United States (referencing former Union servicememebers turned Confederate)

You’re forgetting the fact that they all resigned their United States commissions and formally/publicly renounced their loyalty to the United States prior to joining the Confederate forces.

The way the acted was considered honorable and above board at the time.

 

[Griz882]

No one's been coming after the "namesakes" of Cecil Field, Apollo Soucek Field (Oceana), Saufley, Camp Pendleton, NAS Key West, NAS Whidbey Island, West Point, Fort Huachuca, etc. There’s a few winners out there waiting to be picked.

Given the state of undergraduate education in America today you probably aren’t aware that Key West, Whidbey Island, West Point, and Huachuca are physical locations. I am all for naming all military installations and vessels after geographic and natural elements. As for the rest...give it time.